Cont: The all-new "US Politics and coronavirus" thread pt. 2

[newyorkguy]

Right, the question is why the number mentioning only Covid is 6% and not zero. You don't die from a virus, you have some sort of organ failure as a result of its effects, or as a result of your immune response.

From what I've read, I think that can depend on the hospital or medical center where the death occurs. How much staff they have, how busy they are. In some cases, a person admitted who has tested positive for Covid-19 develops high fever or has difficulty breathing. They pass away. In some facilities, pressed for time or without adequate staff, they simply list 'Covid-19' on the death certificate.

 

[Giordano]

It was a simple statement 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death.
What is there to dispute?

It wasn’t a statement intended to present the results. It wasn’t in the actual text describing or interpreting the results. It wasn’t a conclusion. It wasn’t the data itself. It was just a line in a very brief legend (caption) to the actual very large table that presents the actual results.

If you actually downloaded, looked at, and understood the table you would realize that the table had a long list of other conditions that they evaluated each patient for. Things like respiratory distress (!), sepsis, etc.

Beginning to get it? All of the people in the table died of covid-19. Being very ill almost all the people in the table also had one or more of these other conditions.

You are suggesting that many of these people would have died anyway without the virus due to these other conditions. No, they were very ill with the virus and presented with these other conditions.

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm telling ya, you're all just wasting your time. It's like trying to convince Trump that China isn't paying the money on the tariffs; the American consumers are. It's like trying to get through to Trump that if we stopped testing for Covid 19, we wouldn't have very many cases. Just stop banging your heads against a brick wall.

 

[I Am The Scum]

You are suggesting that many of these people would have died anyway without the virus due to these other conditions.

Definitely using this as my defense if I ever get accused of shooting someone. "Your honor, it wasn't the gunshot. It was his high cholesterol!"

 

[Gavin]

It wasn’t a statement intended to present the results. It wasn’t in the actual text describing or interpreting the results. It wasn’t a conclusion. It wasn’t the data itself. It was just a line in a very brief legend (caption) to the actual very large table that presents the actual results.

If you actually downloaded, looked at, and understood the table you would realize that the table had a long list of other conditions that they evaluated each patient for. Things like respiratory distress (!), sepsis, etc.

Beginning to get it? All of the people in the table died of covid-19. Being very ill almost all the people in the table also had one or more of these other conditions.

You are suggesting that many of these people would have died anyway without the virus due to these other conditions. No, they were very ill with the virus and presented with these other conditions.

Many where more then likely combination of the conditions how many would have died without the virus is unknown they are broke down in age groups and how many are with the those list of the combined conditions.

 

[Aridas]

Many where more then likely combination of the conditions how many would have died without the virus is unknown they are broke down in age groups and how many are with the those list of the combined conditions.

You're grasping at straws.



That's the really short version, at least. As was noted in what you responded to, many of those other conditions were caused by the virus. Even taking that category away, though, it's true that COVID tends to hit people that were already weakened by other factors harder. Generally speaking, though, that also means that those other factors were being managed and they would not have died soon if it weren't for the virus. You might also be thinking that old people are likely to die soon anyways, though? To poke at that a bit, on average, people die a decade earlier than they would otherwise be expected to when covid comes into the picture.

ETA: To poke at the picture, what, exactly, are you trying to point out? Respiratory issues that result from COVID? Yes, and? Circulatory issues that result from COVID? If you haven't heard about COVID causing a heck of a lot of blood clots and outright heart attacks in far too many cases, for example, you haven't been paying that much attention. The ischemic heart disease that you highlighted can eventually lead to more serious complications, yes, but can generally be managed and so the people would fairly certainly not have died soon.

 

[Gavin]

You're grasping at straws.



That's the really short version, at least. As was noted in what you responded to, many of those other conditions were caused by the virus. Even taking that category away, though, it's true that COVID tends to hit people that were already weakened by other factors harder. Generally speaking, though, that also means that those other factors were being managed and they would not have died soon if it weren't for the virus. You might also be thinking that old people are likely to die soon anyways, though? To poke at that a bit, on average, people die a decade earlier than they would otherwise be expected to when covid comes into the picture.

ETA: To poke at the picture, what, exactly, are you trying to point out? Respiratory issues that result from COVID? Yes, and? Circulatory issues that result from COVID? If you haven't heard about COVID causing a heck of a lot of blood clots and outright heart attacks in far too many cases, for example, you haven't been paying that much attention. The ischemic heart disease that you highlighted can eventually lead to more serious complications, yes, but can generally be managed and so the people would fairly certainly not have died soon.

If they caused all of those conditions we would have far more then 3% fatality rate we have now and that’s just the cases we know about since the first of June we have had under a 1% fatality rate no where on the chart does it say the other conditions where caused by covid

 

[Gavin]

Since Feb. 1, 45 American kids under 15 have died of #Covid.

13,088 have died of all other causes.

Since Feb. 1, 11,371 Americans under 55 have died of #Covid (most with serious comorbidities).

189,592 have died of all other causes.

You protect those who are vulnerable with shutting everything down

 

[Meadmaker]

Since Feb. 1, 45 American kids under 15 have died of #Covid.

13,088 have died of all other causes.

Since Feb. 1, 11,371 Americans under 55 have died of #Covid (most with serious comorbidities).

189,592 have died of all other causes.

You protect those who are vulnerable with shutting everything down

High blood pressure, type 2 diabetes. and obesity are not all that serious. What I mean by that is that very few of the people under 55 with those particular comorbidities would have died had it not been for Covid. Most, although not all, of the associated comorbidities were not going to kill these people, at least not for many years, when they were well over 55.

However, your numbers are legitimate.

The unfortunate thing is that there isn't a coherent national strategy that evaluates these numbers, presents them in a reasonable fashion, and uses them to inform public policy. In doing so, they would have to also include other negative outcomes that were less serious than death.

Your analysis isn't bad for a guy on the internet. I think it makes a legitimate argument, but it is necessarily incomplete, simply because you don't have access to all the possible data, nor all the time needed to do a more complete evaluation. It's not bad for an amateur. Let's say, though, that instead of some guy on the internet, you were the President of the United States. If that were the case, I would expect something a bit more in depth.

Sadly, what we have actually gotten is something not as good as what you have presented.

 

[Giordano]

Since Feb. 1, 45 American kids under 15 have died of #Covid.

13,088 have died of all other causes.

Since Feb. 1, 11,371 Americans under 55 have died of #Covid (most with serious comorbidities).

189,592 have died of all other causes.

You protect those who are vulnerable with shutting everything down

Sweden tried that. It was a horrid failure.

Oh, I give up. Worthless trying to present facts to you.

 

[thaiboxerken]

He's not here for facts. He's here to tell us "the truth."

 

[jimbob]

It was a simple statement 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death.
What is there to dispute?

Let's look at the UK's data, because the ONS has comprehensive records of weekly deaths in England and Wales, which I have got going back to the middle of 1999.

Excess deaths are so far about 0.1% of the total population with somewhere between 7%-15% having been infected.

But the fatality rate is not the whole story.

It looks from lots of studies that somewhere between 5-10% of have at least medium term health damage. Even those who had so-called"mild" COVID.

My daughter has told me to watch the following programme - review here as it's probably not available in the US, about a couple of identical twin doctors and TV presenters wiho filmed their experiences in the UK. Xand, a healthy 41 year old ended up with what seems like a mild case, but later had heart problems and in fact needed to be defibrillated in his brother's hospital. It would have been quite possible for such symptoms to cause death and not to be linked to COVID-19.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-...-a-rigorous-dispatch-from-the-covid-frontline


It's serious and maims far more than it kills

 

[Stacyhs]

He's not here for facts. He's here to tell us "the truth."

Now you're getting it!

 

[Aridas]

If they caused all of those conditions we would have far more then 3% fatality rate we have now and that’s just the cases we know about since the first of June we have had under a 1% fatality rate no where on the chart does it say the other conditions where caused by covid

Let me re-emphasize two things, then. First -

Even taking that category away, though, it's true that COVID tends to hit people that were already weakened by other factors harder. Generally speaking, though, that also means that those other factors were being managed and they would not have died soon if it weren't for the virus. You might also be thinking that old people are likely to die soon anyways, though? To poke at that a bit, on average, people die a decade earlier than they would otherwise be expected to when covid comes into the picture.

Second, COVID is messy, symptomatically, and doesn't end up doing damage to different people in all the same ways and severity, as I'm pretty sure you well know. Thus, "If they caused all those conditions, we would expect far more than" is a nonstarter as an argument, in and of itself. No, COVID does not always cause respiratory distress. Duh. It does cause it in many cases, though, and it's worth gathering the data when it does to help give us a better picture of what's going on. It's not likely that COVID caused ischemic heart disease, on the other hand, but such was already accounted for anyways in what I addressed in that first emphasis.

Also, is there a particular reason why something like "respiratory distress" or sepsis would be specifically attributed to COVID in that chart? Or is that just more of you flailing about and trying to grasp at straws?

 

[jimbob]

High blood pressure, type 2 diabetes. and obesity are not all that serious. What I mean by that is that very few of the people under 55 with those particular comorbidities would have died had it not been for Covid. Most, although not all, of the associated comorbidities were not going to kill these people, at least not for many years, when they were well over 55.

However, your numbers are legitimate.

The unfortunate thing is that there isn't a coherent national strategy that evaluates these numbers, presents them in a reasonable fashion, and uses them to inform public policy. In doing so, they would have to also include other negative outcomes that were less serious than death.

Your analysis isn't bad for a guy on the internet. I think it makes a legitimate argument, but it is necessarily incomplete, simply because you don't have access to all the possible data, nor all the time needed to do a more complete evaluation. It's not bad for an amateur. Let's say, though, that instead of some guy on the internet, you were the President of the United States. If that were the case, I would expect something a bit more in depth.

Sadly, what we have actually gotten is something not as good as what you have presented.

I have done a fair on this on Twitter bit mainly with UK data, but there's much that's applicable to the US


https://twitter.com/ParkinJim/status/1275854955778314240?s=20

 

[Meadmaker]

What a wonderful world that would be.

(This was in response to my description of a panel of epidemiologists publishing a report, updated monthly, and including dissenting opinions where appropriate).


It occurs to me that Nancy Pelosi could also make that happen. It wouldn't be as good, coming from a House committee, as it would be if it came from a competent White House, but since there is no competent White House available, it probably ought to be done. Form some sort of "House Select Committee on COVID-19" and make that part of their work, instead of just holding hearings where congressmen ask, "What do you think is the worst thing about President Trump?"

 

[newyorkguy]

He's not here for facts. He's here to tell us "the truth."

One of the reasons the arguments seem unconvincing is that they're being presented in a vague, fragmented and semi-illiterate way. Some of the text appears likely to have been copied from a source without attribution. In one message Covid-19 is referenced as #Covid.

By the way we just passed five million cases. Some health professionals are urging states where the virus has been surging to order new shutdowns.

A coalition of health professionals is urging the nation's leaders to step back from the push to reopen the economy and shut down nonessential businesses to prevent the loss of more lives from the spiraling pandemic. NPR link

 

[Craig4]

And of course Trump's executive orders don't do anything close to what he says they do. He ordered the treasury to find funds to help with evictions and expects states without money to pay part of the unemployment. Does President Dumb **** not understand what the unemployment rate will look like when all those state and municipal employees get laid off?

 

[Craig4]

CNN is reporting that Mark Meadows said he wasn't convinced of the science behind wearing masks. I hope the stupid son of a bitch doesn't believe the science behind the vaccine either.

 

[JeanTate]

Let me see if I understand ...

Since Feb. 1, 45 American kids under 15 have died of #Covid.

13,088 have died of all other causes.

Since Feb. 1, 11,371 Americans under 55 have died of #Covid (most with serious comorbidities).

189,592 have died of all other causes.

You protect those who are vulnerable with shutting everything down

Combined with U.S. Census Bureau data, approximately 60,773,955 American kids under 15 did not die of #Covid.

Since Feb. 1, approximately 229,800,629 Americans under 55 did not die of #Covid (with or without serious comorbidities).

Shutting everything down protects everyone except those who are vulnerable.