Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 345678910 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 244

Thread: Covid Discussion

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    15,890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JPtheBeasta View Post
    Tricky situation, indeed. Do you shut down athletics because your handful of high donors can’t go to games? Maybe we need a handful of Covid-19 protection suites for these folks.
    Maybe give them an optional high-quality stream and charge others for the stream. Season ticket holders would get bandwidth priority.

    Interestingly, NBA is looking at bringing all its teams to Orlando and playing out the season/playoffs on the ESPN Wide World of Sports Complex at Walt Disney World Resort according to Seth Davis on his The Athletic podcast.
    'I found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay… small acts of kindness and love.'
    - Gandalf the Grey

    ________________________________



    Foo Time

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,103

    Default

    There was little evidence for mask wear prior to Covid-19. There are newer studies on both sides of the equation. Necessary mask use by non-sick persons in the general public is controversial for good reasons.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    15,890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JPtheBeasta View Post
    There was little evidence for mask wear prior to Covid-19. There are newer studies on both sides of the equation. Necessary mask use by non-sick persons in the general public is controversial for good reasons.
    I will wear a mask at stores or if in close contact with non-family members, but I don't wear them when I run or cycle, it is too hard to breathe. That is a good technique for simulating training at altitude, though.
    'I found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay… small acts of kindness and love.'
    - Gandalf the Grey

    ________________________________



    Foo Time

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kitzbuel View Post
    I will wear a mask at stores or if in close contact with non-family members, but I don't wear them when I run or cycle, it is too hard to breathe. That is a good technique for simulating training at altitude, though.
    That article above should make you feel better about exercising outdoors without one. (The low exposure time conversation)

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LTownZag View Post
    Your list seamlessly mixes 2 local political policies with 2 virus biology predictions or viral mitigation methods.

    I agree (and think 99% of people would agree) that were many poor political choices made at nearly all level of USA politics and our regulatory agencies (FDA/CDC) as well as in most other countries. Up through the second week in February, Trump was still effusively praising China's leader and China's response, and saying this would soon disappear. He wasn't alone in such sentiments.

    I agree (and think 99% of people would agree) that initial health agency suggestions to not bother with masks or which minimized airborne human spread were counterproductive to fighting COVID. How much of his was based on well-intentioned ignorance vs unethical political calculations, I don't know.

    NYC, as part of NY state, must follow that state's constitution which requires the state government to house and home (with a bed) everyone in the state every night. It's a foolish political policy, in my opinion, but leaves the sitting governor with few options when it comes to finding a willing facility to accept a recovering homeless person or recovering senior citizen with COVID. With NYC hospitals at or near full in April, recovering patients had to be discharged and there were not step-down severity clinics willing or able to accept these folks.

    Was 1.7 million American deaths (over a time horizon of years) really incorrect as a worst-case scenario? With no lockdowns, large gathering bans, or major social distancing or masking, what percentage of the country do you think would get infected in 24 months from March 2020? If it's half the country and there's an infected death rate of 1%, that is 1.7million deaths. I don't think we'll end up nearly that high, but I hardly see it as an unreasonable or baseless "worst case scenario".

    -----------------

    There's a kind of nihilism at hand among many who are having their initial predictions and worldview challenged by the state of reality today. An attitudinal fallback to universal distrust when the median stat or trend line isn't what they would have expected.

    "We don't know many things, so I don't trust any data"
    "Some were prominently wrong so now all the stats are crooked, all the viral research is wrong, we don't know enough to make any conclusions"

    I'm a skeptical person and sympathetic to some of this worldview, but you must ask yourself if it's selective:

    If COVID had been far less deadly than the media first predicted, and Trump's predictions domestically and faith in China's leadership had proven well-founded, would you still be equally as skeptical of any stats showing a hypothetical low transmission and very few deaths? Or would you more easily believe those hypothetical low stats produced by the same agencies, universities, testing systems, etc that you now doubt?

    If an Obama, or Hillary Clinton, or Bernie Sanders, or (Insert any team you hate here) presidential administration had been in charge right now, and had publicly downplayed the threat, how much more would you believe the accuracy of current high death counts or possibly higher deaths from all-cause mortality increases, if you knew that such tragedy would be politically blamable on "the other team" which you previously disliked?

    To be skeptical is to be wise. To be selectively skeptical is to be... human? And for the record I am not immune from this selectivity.
    Two things. The initial model that most all of the political decisions were made included mitigation efforts including social distancing and predicted your 1.7 to 2.2 million deaths.

    The political calculations of the team out of power included accusations of racism for banning flights from China, encouragements to visit restaurants in Chinatown, admonishments for suggesting European travel was not smart and all manner of “Don’t panic, this is nothing.” Lots of revisionist history going on.

    Neither “ team” got it all right or anywhere near. Suggesting anyone could have done better with the available information is a fool’s game.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    sierra foothills
    Posts
    13,350

    Default

    [QUOTE=Markburn1;1519512Suggesting anyone could have done better with the available information is a fool’s game.[/QUOTE]

    too wide a brush stroke seems to me. yes, difficult calls, but some appear to have listened to the experts while others did not. Nothing revisionist about it, just different calls made with the same data

    https://www.propublica.org/article/t...-as-california

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    sierra foothills
    Posts
    13,350

    Default

    re. masks, I wear one to protect my fellow citizens, not to protect myself; I wear it so I don't spread it if I have it, not so I don't get it. The data is pretty clear on that. So when folks are out in those situations with no mask, they aren't being brave and risking their own health, lol; they are putting others at risk with fake bravado.

    Let's say I think my freedom includes driving 100mph, but since it endangers the freedoms of others, there are restrictions on my speed. Same with driving drunk. Same with polluting waterways up river; if my freedoms put others at risk, there are restrictions. It's not a new thought. I can't just go grab a woman to express my freedom becasue it infringes on hers. I could literally go on and on.

    But the leadership on this was so divisive that not wearing a mask is somehow about freedom...what a sad joke. reveals a basic lack of understanding about why to wear a mask seems to me, and the total politicization of it.

    and before you start, I've been for reopening for some time...but not stupid and uninformed as if this is about freedom. Is freedom ordering meat plant workers back to infested sites? Is it authorizing warrantless spying on US citizens? Now that stuff is about freedom in my humble opinion

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    Two things. The initial model that most all of the political decisions were made included mitigation efforts including social distancing and predicted your 1.7 to 2.2 million deaths.

    The political calculations of the team out of power included accusations of racism for banning flights from China, encouragements to visit restaurants in Chinatown, admonishments for suggesting European travel was not smart and all manner of “Don’t panic, this is nothing.” Lots of revisionist history going on.

    Neither “ team” got it all right or anywhere near. Suggesting anyone could have done better with the available information is a fool’s game.
    And not suggesting that there could be anyone (out of 300 million) who could have done better than Trump and his team isn't a fool's game?

    I definitely think *somebody* could have done better than our national status quo even given the limited info. Look to New Zealand, Australia, Greece, South Korea, Germany, etc. Or simply take your current most favored governor, imagine them as president or ambassador to China, or head of the CDC or FDA, and extrapolate from there. I have a hard time imaging that the median republican governor or senator wouldn't have done better.

    At no point did I say or imply that either conventional political left-right team got it all, or even mostly right. The "team" that got it right more than anyone were the smart silicon valley venture capitalists, nerdy tech disagreeable coder types, iconoclast economists, and others who make their living thinking exponentially and finding phenomena that begin small and have the traits to grow huge.

    Mark, what was the model (name? source?) predicting 1.7-2.2million domestic deaths even with social distancing mitigation? I'd love to go back and read about it.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    San Diego, Ca.
    Posts
    7,730

    Default

    Dr. Fauci Says Staying Closed Too Long Could Cause Irreversible Damage, But Urges States To Take ‘Very Significant Precautions’

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZagaZags View Post
    Dr. Fauci Says Staying Closed Too Long Could Cause Irreversible Damage, But Urges States To Take ‘Very Significant Precautions’
    That's basically what I believe. Fauci has been on point the whole time and he says very positive things about his Jesuit education which is an extra plus in my book.
    Agent provocateur

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    15,890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bballbeachbum View Post
    re. masks, I wear one to protect my fellow citizens, not to protect myself; I wear it so I don't spread it if I have it, not so I don't get it. The data is pretty clear on that. So when folks are out in those situations with no mask, they aren't being brave and risking their own health, lol; they are putting others at risk with fake bravado.

    Let's say I think my freedom includes driving 100mph, but since it endangers the freedoms of others, there are restrictions on my speed. Same with driving drunk. Same with polluting waterways up river; if my freedoms put others at risk, there are restrictions. It's not a new thought. I can't just go grab a woman to express my freedom becasue it infringes on hers. I could literally go on and on.

    But the leadership on this was so divisive that not wearing a mask is somehow about freedom...what a sad joke. reveals a basic lack of understanding about why to wear a mask seems to me, and the total politicization of it.

    and before you start, I've been for reopening for some time...but not stupid and uninformed as if this is about freedom. Is freedom ordering meat plant workers back to infested sites? Is it authorizing warrantless spying on US citizens? Now that stuff is about freedom in my humble opinion
    Agreed


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    'I found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay… small acts of kindness and love.'
    - Gandalf the Grey

    ________________________________



    Foo Time

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kitzbuel View Post
    Agreed


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Bballbeachbum - excellent post.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,478

    Default

    Last edited by Markburn1; 05-24-2020 at 10:30 AM.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7,449

    Default

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/coronaviru...ve_twopack_hed

    "12:50 p.m.: New York sports teams can train again
    New York professional sports leagues can begin spring training, Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced on Sunday.

    That includes teams and athletes part of MLB, the NBA, WNBA, NFL, NHL, U.S. Tennis Association and Major League Soccer.

    The teams must follow appropriate health protocols, the governor said.

    Last week, Cuomo encouraged major sports teams in the state to reopen without fans, a point he repeated at Sunday's daily press briefing.

    "I believe sports can come back without having people in the stadium and in the arena," Cuomo said. "Work out the economics if you can. We want people to be able to watch sports, to the extent people are staying home. It gives people something to do and is a return to normalcy."

    Most live sports have been shut down since March due to the coronavirus pandemic. Last Sunday, NASCAR held its first race since lockdown measures began in South Carolina.

    New York continues to reopen its economy this week. Campgrounds can reopen on Monday, followed by veterinarian offices on Tuesday, Cuomo said.

    The mid-Hudson region and Long Island are still on track to reopen Tuesday and Wednesday, respectively, the governor said.

    There were 109 daily deaths in the state from COVID-19 in the last 24 hours, Cuomo said Sunday."
    It's not funny.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,717

    Default

    Beach says "But the leadership on this was so divisive that not wearing a mask is somehow about freedom...what a sad joke. reveals a basic lack of understanding about why to wear a mask seems to me, and the total politicization of it." I f you have something somewhere that confirms this, I would be surprised. I don't see division from leadership ( I do see whatever "leadership" you're referring to being attacked incessantly by majority of media) but NOBODY I've seen says not wearing a mask is about freedom...……<--this is where my comment on Beach's post stops.

    _---------> this is where a new general comment begins...Everyone I know of recommends distancing and masks......and nobody's said don't wear a mask. Almost universally leadership and anyone with a brain has said wear masks! Where did you get this idea??I have seen statements to the effect wherein" you do not HAVE to wear a mask".....and you don't. Never yet have I seen the grotesque idea that mixes politics with mask wearing. Maybe there some confusion over reopening the country for business and mask wearing. Media's made that a political item. "you care about money more than health" lol.....

    WEAR a mask! But there are 8 states who've done nothing and they do have low low infection and death rates (for whatever death rates mean in these confusing data sets) . Most people don't require commands from on on high to wear a mask in an infectious environment. Just common sense. No offense intended but I had to drop a note on this one.

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,103

    Default

    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2766367

    In this community seroprevalence study in Los Angeles County, the prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 was 4.65%. The estimate implies that approximately 367 000 adults had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, which is substantially greater than the 8430 cumulative number of confirmed infections in the county on April 10.3 Therefore, fatality rates based on confirmed cases may be higher than rates based on number of infections. In addition, contact tracing methods to limit the spread of infection will face considerable challenges.
    This study took some steps to remediate some of concerns persons had about the USC and Santa Clara studies, but with similar results. In places where ubiquitous PCR nasal/throat swab was done, such as Vo, Italy, or New Rochelle, NY, you also get much higher infection rates than you currently see (which are the result of testing the patients you suspect have the disease, as it only detects active infection). The implication is that a lot of people mounted a defense to this disease. The comment above about the difficulty of contact tracing all 367,000 persons with Covid-19 in L.A. would be very difficult.

    You can multiply the population of Washington State (or the U.S., or wherever) by 4.65% to get the denominator. Divide the the total deaths in Washington (or the respective area) from Covid by this number. That is the death rate for total cases of Covid in that area, and you will get a much lower death rate than we currently have. I did this for AZ and it drops the death rate to 0.3%.

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JPtheBeasta View Post
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2766367



    This study took some steps to remediate some of concerns persons had about the USC and Santa Clara studies, but with similar results. In places where ubiquitous PCR nasal/throat swab was done, such as Vo, Italy, or New Rochelle, NY, you also get much higher infection rates than you currently see (which are the result of testing the patients you suspect have the disease, as it only detects active infection). The implication is that a lot of people mounted a defense to this disease. The comment above about the difficulty of contact tracing all 367,000 persons with Covid-19 in L.A. would be very difficult.

    You can multiply the population of Washington State (or the U.S., or wherever) by 4.65% to get the denominator. Divide the the total deaths in Washington (or the respective area) from Covid by this number. That is the death rate for total cases of Covid in that area, and you will get a much lower death rate than we currently have. I did this for AZ and it drops the death rate to 0.3%.
    Is that we’re getting g a better look at this disease. naps I come. Odds to. Also worth a look is the Hoover Institute data. It’s a revisit of the Johns Hopkins data. An eye opener. This disease is very. As for the elderly with other diseases. We knew that whT we did not know is that it seems pretty benign for normal people who don’t have predisposed other diseases. Pretty much like influenza. Certainly nothing like the beast the media has indicated.

    Masks and distance is all that’s needed. Let’s play ball! B

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JPtheBeasta View Post
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2766367



    This study took some steps to remediate some of concerns persons had about the USC and Santa Clara studies, but with similar results. In places where ubiquitous PCR nasal/throat swab was done, such as Vo, Italy, or New Rochelle, NY, you also get much higher infection rates than you currently see (which are the result of testing the patients you suspect have the disease, as it only detects active infection). The implication is that a lot of people mounted a defense to this disease. The comment above about the difficulty of contact tracing all 367,000 persons with Covid-19 in L.A. would be very difficult.

    You can multiply the population of Washington State (or the U.S., or wherever) by 4.65% to get the denominator. Divide the the total deaths in Washington (or the respective area) from Covid by this number. That is the death rate for total cases of Covid in that area, and you will get a much lower death rate than we currently have. I did this for AZ and it drops the death rate to 0.3%.
    I wouldn't assume just because one county has 4.65% seroprevalence that the same value can be carried over to any other area in the US.

    With the New York City serology studies providing a different conclusion about the death rate, there's only a few plausible explanations. The LA county study is overestimating the seroprevalance, the reported deaths in New York City are overestimated, or there are different strains with different IFRs.

    The calculation of estimated deaths and estimated seroprevance in NYC gives us an IFR of 1.4%:
    https://www.worldometers.info/corona...us-death-rate/
    Agent provocateur

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,717

    Default

    IN NYC, we knew the elderly would have the highest victims......especially with the "stuffing" of the elderly in high risk nursing homes. I agree it's a big number. For the under 60 crown who are healthy at entry are very low risk. The one thing in the NY data is the absence of confirmed data and the over estimation of who had the disease. In a few more months, we'll know more.

    Most recent data is from Hoover Inst. THis dease is way oversold..media scared everyone when they had little data. Projects now show that 1/10th of one percent of the under 60 group with no other disease will be infected or die. Hoover took the Johns Hopkins data ( the best data around as far as I can tell) and takes hard focused looked at the overall and the subgroups.

    Politics fails the test when the data is known. We're getting better at the latter. A lot better. All those predictions were not worth a keystroke without accurate information which is only coming out now. Media say we're approching 100 K death but only half that number is confirmed as diseased from COVID. EVen if the 100 K death is accurate, we also know the majority of the elderly ( 80-90% of the deaths) had other major diseases that killed them. COVID was just an add on.

    Lets play ball. !!

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    sierra foothills
    Posts
    13,350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MDABE80 View Post
    Beach says "But the leadership on this was so divisive that not wearing a mask is somehow about freedom...what a sad joke. reveals a basic lack of understanding about why to wear a mask seems to me, and the total politicization of it." I f you have something somewhere that confirms this, I would be surprised. I don't see division from leadership ( I do see whatever "leadership" you're referring to being attacked incessantly by majority of media) but NOBODY I've seen says not wearing a mask is about freedom...……<--this is where my comment on Beach's post stops.

    _---------> this is where a new general comment begins...Everyone I know of recommends distancing and masks......and nobody's said don't wear a mask. Almost universally leadership and anyone with a brain has said wear masks! Where did you get this idea??I have seen statements to the effect wherein" you do not HAVE to wear a mask".....and you don't. Never yet have I seen the grotesque idea that mixes politics with mask wearing. Maybe there some confusion over reopening the country for business and mask wearing. Media's made that a political item. "you care about money more than health" lol.....

    WEAR a mask! But there are 8 states who've done nothing and they do have low low infection and death rates (for whatever death rates mean in these confusing data sets) . Most people don't require commands from on on high to wear a mask in an infectious environment. Just common sense. No offense intended but I had to drop a note on this one.
    No offense taken.

    Let's look at it the other way then...the leadership has been unifying on this issue.

    So for just one example, when VP Mike Pence, the leader of President Trump's coronavirus task force, chose not to wear a mask when he visited the Mayo Clinic on April 28, where one was required to wear a mask to enter Mayo by that point...that was a gesture of unification? to demonstrate to all that if you are required to wear a mask, you actually don't have to, and so we are better unified! And it had nothing to do with politics.

    Never yet have I seen the grotesque idea that mixes politics with mask wearing

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MDABE80 View Post
    Everyone I know of recommends distancing and masks......and nobody's said don't wear a mask. Almost universally leadership and anyone with a brain has said wear masks! Where did you get this idea??I have seen statements to the effect wherein" you do not HAVE to wear a mask".....and you don't. Never yet have I seen the grotesque idea that mixes politics with mask wearing. Maybe there some confusion over reopening the country for business and mask wearing. Media's made that a political item. "you care about money more than health" lol.....

    WEAR a mask! But there are 8 states who've done nothing and they do have low low infection and death rates (for whatever death rates mean in these confusing data sets) . Most people don't require commands from on on high to wear a mask in an infectious environment. Just common sense. No offense intended but I had to drop a note on this one.
    The vice president infamously refused to wear a mask while touring the Mayo Clinic while it had COVID patients.

    Has the president ever worn as mask in public? He refused to wear a mask while on a tour of the large Honeywell mask factory. When he first mentioned masks at his press briefing, he emphasized that he himself would not be wearing one:


    As far as republican or conservative leaders explicitly criticizing masks, as opposed to prominently and uniformly not wearing them on the senate floor, etc, the editor of the american conservative magazine "First Things" (Russell Reno) just wrote:

    By the way, the WWII vets did not wear masks. They're men, not cowards. Masks=enforced cowardice.
    Just to reinforce. Talked to my son in Seattle. The mask culture if fear driven. Masks+cowardice. It's a regime dominate by fear of infection and fear of causing of infection. Both are species of cowardice.
    Look, let's face it. There are those who are terrified, and those who are not. Where do you stand? Terror or a more reasonable position? Will you visit our mother? If so, the mask is a PC gesture. If not, you are a moral monster.


    MDABE80, I am glad you support mask wearing and think it is wise and shouldn't be seen as a political partisan issue. That's something you and I agree on and I am encouraged by that agreement. Currently democrat-identifying people are 20% more likely than republican identifying people to wear masks.

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MDABE80 View Post
    IN NYC, we knew the elderly would have the highest victims......especially with the "stuffing" of the elderly in high risk nursing homes. ... EVen if the 100 K death is accurate, we also know the majority of the elderly ( 80-90% of the deaths) had other major diseases that killed them.

    NYC has had a relatively high number of young deaths and a low percent of its deaths occur among retired folks or anyone old enough for a nursing home. It's a strange USA outlier for the young age of the victims. Majority dead have been under 75.

    Many foreign, especially poorer countries are also seeing younger-skewing deaths (similar or even younger than NYC)

    In Brazil, 15 percent of deaths have been people under 50 — a rate more than 10 times greater than in Italy or Spain. In Mexico, the trend is even more stark: Nearly one-fourth of the dead have been between 25 and 49. In India, officials reported this month that nearly half of the dead were younger than 60. In Rio de Janeiro state, more than two-thirds of hospitalizations are for people younger than 49.
    -People under 75 made up just over half of of NYC's deaths as of 5/13.

    -People under 75 consistently make up a 35-40% of national deaths (SEE JP's chart below).

    -People under 65 account for 29% of Texas deaths.

    Unless you classify elderly as persons in their 60s, I don't believe any state or country in the world has had 80%+ deaths among the elderly.
    Last edited by LTownZag; 05-25-2020 at 09:18 AM.

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sonuvazag View Post
    I wouldn't assume just because one county has 4.65% seroprevalence that the same value can be carried over to any other area in the US.

    With the New York City serology studies providing a different conclusion about the death rate, there's only a few plausible explanations. The LA county study is overestimating the seroprevalence, the reported deaths in New York City are overestimated, or there are different strains with different IFRs.

    The calculation of estimated deaths and estimated seroprevalence in NYC gives us an IFR of 1.4%:
    https://www.worldometers.info/corona...us-death-rate/
    Population demographics seem to play into the death rate, if it is accurate that places with higher numbers of African American patients have the highest death rates.

    I agree that generalizability of the data is a caveat, although everywhere these studies look it suggests a higher prevalence than the PCR tests suggest, which is the major point. This is except for the study of MLB employees, which was much lower (I think 0.7% prevalence). It stands to reason that the prevalence is more than is detected by PCR when many persons are asymptomatic or have very mild symptoms to the tune of 80%. It's a crude calculation that oversimplifies the data but one could divide the total number of PCR-confirmed cases and divide by .2 to get a ballpark of what the actual cases might be in this country. The antibody numbers were obviously worse in New York, and at a homeless shelter in Boston, and I would never use these numbers to extrapolate out to the rest of the country.

    In regard to NYC, the 1% death rate is much lower than the case fatality rate of 6.5% that is produced when looking at the PCR numbers. New York is tough, in my opinion, because it has been an outlier. I never assumed that their antibody numbers could be generalized to the rest of the country. California has numbers that are more in line with other antibody testing areas, or areas when closer to universal PCR testing was done.

    California has had one of the most strict lockdowns, so there's some conversation that will be had about that, I'm sure.

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LTownZag View Post
    NYC has had a relatively low percent of its deaths occur among retired folks or anyone old enough for a nursing home. It's a strange outlier for the young age of the victims. Most have been under 75.

    People under 75 made up just over half of of NYC's deaths as of 5/13.
    People under 75 consistently make up a 30-35% of national deaths.
    People under 65 account for 29% of Texas deaths.

    Unless you classify elderly as persons in their 60s, I don't believe any state or country in the world has had 80%+ deaths among the elderly.
    I think u need some references on these statements. So go find solid references and get back to us.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LTownZag View Post
    NYC has had a relatively low percent of its deaths occur among retired folks or anyone old enough for a nursing home. It's a strange outlier for the young age of the victims. Most have been under 75.

    People under 75 made up just over half of of NYC's deaths as of 5/13.
    People under 75 consistently make up a 30-35% of national deaths.
    People under 65 account for 29% of Texas deaths.

    Unless you classify elderly as persons in their 60s, I don't believe any state or country in the world has had 80%+ deaths among the elderly.
    According to the Beer's criteria, as provided by the American Geriatric Society, anyone over 65 is included in the "older adult" population. The Merck manual also accepts this definition when discussing geriatrics.

    I've include the following chart again so persons don't get distracted by your switching of data sets between NY, the U.S. and Texas.

    Covid Deaths By Age Group:

    Data from the CDC website, accessed 5/17/2020 [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/c...kly/index.htm]


    Age Group Covid Deaths Population Percent of All Covid Deaths Percent of Age Group Deaths Per 100K Persons
    <1 4 3,848,208 0.01% 0.00% 0.10
    1-4 2 15,962,067 0.00% 0.00% 0.01
    5-14 6 41,075,169 0.01% 0.00% 0.01
    15-24 59 42,970,800 0.11% 0.00% 0.14
    25-34 388 45,697,774 0.71% 0.00% 0.85
    35-44 973 41,277,888 1.77% 0.00% 2.36
    45-54 2,772 41,631,699 5.05% 0.01 6.658
    55-64 6,725 42,272,636 12.26% 0.02% 15.91
    65-74 11,524 30,492,316 21.01% 0.04% 37.79
    75-84 14,930 15,394,374 27.21% 0.10% 96.98
    85< 17478 6,544,503 31.86% 0.27% 267.06
    All 54861 327,167,434 100% 0.02% 16.77

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •