The new Corona virus, should we worry?

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
1,893
Reaction score
449
Points
83
One thing I noticed is that roughly 35% of all patients who are hospitalized for covid wind up going into ICU.

Of course, the next question - which I don't have data for - is what % of ICU patients die and what % recover?

In general, it does seem to track that the days with higher death totals correspond with a drop in the ICU totals - which makes sense, because it's logical that most of the patients who die were in ICU.

one would have to have a lot more detailed data to really track the path of patients into and out of the hospital, and into and out of ICU.

I don't know if it means anything, but so far, the cumulative number of ICU patients is at 700, and the death total is at 700. Obviously, not everyone who goes into ICU dies, so there are patients who die without going into ICU.
I agree it would be really nice to have more detailed data about counts and transitions from one state to another.

I did hear several times that, in the past anyway, if a patient progressed as far as being intubated and thus on a ventilator, at that point they had only about an 80% chance of survival. I heard that number reiterated lately, but I've never seen anybody publish numbers to back that up. In any event, one ought to consider two levels of "severe" - namely one in ICU, and another in ICU + on ventilator. If the 80% figure is in fact true, then 20% of those to go on a ventilator actually transition back to just in ICU but not on ventilator, and then (hopefully) transition back to regular hospital bed and then to discharged. I've heard anecdotal evidence of that happening anyway.

The thing that the covid-counters (the COVID-19 version of bean counters) ought to know (but don't seem to know cuz they're not collecting sufficient and fine-grained enough data), is that the various statuses of a Covid patient really just amount to a finite-state system with associated transition probabilities (the sort of finite-state system that one might study in computer science, say) and if we could define the states suitably and record state transitions in sufficient detail, then that would greatly help the computer modelers develop a better model of the lethality of the coronavirus.

For instance, with good historical numbers on the probabilities of the state transitions, one might be able to infer a hidden semi-Markov model for the state transitions, and then the latter might also be usable as a component of an epidemiological model that is more faithful to the "truth of coronavirus" than the various (currently) bad models that are based on (very off-base) flu models. It's beyond me (and irks me) why they don't collect those detailed historical statistics (or maybe they do but they just don't make them available except to certain privileged people). These stats could also be used to demonstrate that progress has been made (or not) on treatment regimes, since it might show that 3 months into the virus there are now fewer transitions from regular hospital bed to ICU than there were at 1 month into the virus (in relative terms, not absolute terms). It just seems so obvious that they should want these statistics, it baffles me why they just don't collect them. Maybe they are just too busy saving lives - that's the only excuse I can think of that would let them off the hook.
 
Last edited:

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
10,650
Reaction score
1,378
Points
113
Eric on record in the hoax camp.
"What libtards don't get is that my dad went on national TV for weeks and told the country to stay at home for something that's a total hoax made up by the #Resistance. That's what true leadership looks like. Also, the reason that both of us are doing this interview from home is that this is a total hoax."
 
Last edited:

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
14,295
Reaction score
2,023
Points
113
Eric on record in the hoax camp.
Every single person who has ever purchased a ticket to a Trump rally, was already going to vote for him, no matter what.

There has never been a single person who wasn't sure about Trump that said "you know, I think I'll go check out one of these 'MAGA rallies' and see what it's like."

Never been a single person who wasn't sure about Trump that watched video of him speaking at a MAGA rally and then said "wow, yes that is definitely the guy for me! I wasn't sure before, but now he has sealed the deal!"
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
17,891
Reaction score
1,940
Points
113
"What libtards don't get is that my dad went on national TV for weeks and told the country to stay at home for something that's a total hoax made up by the #Resistance. That's what true leadership looks like. Also, the reason that both of us are doing this interview from home is that this is a total hoax."
I've read that eight times now, and I'm still not fully processing its brilliance.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
9,414
Reaction score
1,040
Points
113
Minnesota Covid-19 Update - Sunday, May 17.
With data reported by 4pm the previous day.

Positive Cases 15,668 +699.

Deaths 722 +22.

Deaths at long-term care and assisted living 587 +19

Patients Hospitalized 487 -6.

Patients In ICU 221 -4.

Total Tests processed 150,605 +7,324.
 

diehard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
32,000
Reaction score
147
Points
63
I agree it would be really nice to have more detailed data about counts and transitions from one state to another.

I did hear several times that, in the past anyway, if a patient progressed as far as being intubated and thus on a ventilator, at that point they had only about an 80% chance of survival. I heard that number reiterated lately, but I've never seen anybody publish numbers to back that up. In any event, one ought to consider two levels of "severe" - namely one in ICU, and another in ICU + on ventilator. If the 80% figure is in fact true, then 20% of those to go on a ventilator actually transition back to just in ICU but not on ventilator, and then (hopefully) transition back to regular hospital bed and then to discharged. I've heard anecdotal evidence of that happening anyway.

The thing that the covid-counters (the COVID-19 version of bean counters) ought to know (but don't seem to know cuz they're not collecting sufficient and fine-grained enough data), is that the various statuses of a Covid patient really just amount to a finite-state system with associated transition probabilities (the sort of finite-state system that one might study in computer science, say) and if we could define the states suitably and record state transitions in sufficient detail, then that would greatly help the computer modelers develop a better model of the lethality of the coronavirus.

For instance, with good historical numbers on the probabilities of the state transitions, one might be able to infer a hidden semi-Markov model for the state transitions, and then the latter might also be usable as a component of an epidemiological model that is more faithful to the "truth of coronavirus" than the various (currently) bad models that are based on (very off-base) flu models. It's beyond me (and irks me) why they don't collect those detailed historical statistics (or maybe they do but they just don't make them available except to certain privileged people). These stats could also be used to demonstrate that progress has been made (or not) on treatment regimes, since it might show that 3 months into the virus there are now fewer transitions from regular hospital bed to ICU than there were at 1 month into the virus (in relative terms, not absolute terms). It just seems so obvious that they should want these statistics, it baffles me why they just don't collect them. Maybe they are just too busy saving lives - that's the only excuse I can think of that would let them off the hook.
I'd like to see some numbers crunched and you seem like you might be the only honest guy to do it. What are the number regarding the hospitalized and dead that had serious chronic disease or were at least 50 pounds overweight. Markedly obese.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
14,876
Reaction score
1,161
Points
113
Seasonal flu...
That NOAA tweeter is unhinged and legitimately may need professional help. Looking over some of those twitter posts, ranting about “reinfections” and sterility is fear mongering at its worst. There is no evidence of reinfection. Nobody has been able to culture live virus from the “reinfected” persons, or anyone else for that matter beyond the first 8 days or so of symptoms. Maybe some people have extended viral replication for an extended time or have trouble clearing the virus due to immune issues or steroids or other reasons. Some people seem to shed bits of dead virus for weeks and maybe months and might test positive. This is a known phenomenon.

There is no evidence of sterility. There isn’t even any evidence of orchitis from COVID-19 that might lead to problems. Please post some legitimate evidence of sterility before blasting misinformation.

Get a grip folks.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
16,859
Reaction score
440
Points
83
I'd like to see some numbers crunched and you seem like you might be the only honest guy to do it. What are the number regarding the hospitalized and dead that had serious chronic disease or were at least 50 pounds overweight. Markedly obese.
Asking for a friend? CutDown, I think CantGetRockHard is too shy to ask you to please also add scraggly gray ponytails to the analysis. Also, if it’s not too much trouble, add in depression caused by being summarily forced to resign as a school board member. You could be saving a life here.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
14,295
Reaction score
2,023
Points
113
That NOAA tweeter is unhinged and legitimately may need professional help. Looking over some of those twitter posts, ranting about “reinfections” and sterility is fear mongering at its worst. There is no evidence of reinfection. Nobody has been able to culture live virus from the “reinfected” persons, or anyone else for that matter beyond the first 8 days or so of symptoms. Maybe some people have extended viral replication for an extended time or have trouble clearing the virus due to immune issues or steroids or other reasons. Some people seem to shed bits of dead virus for weeks and maybe months and might test positive. This is a known phenomenon.

There is no evidence of sterility. There isn’t even any evidence of orchitis from COVID-19 that might lead to problems. Please post some legitimate evidence of sterility before blasting misinformation.

Get a grip folks.
Honestly, I think you need to get a grip.

People are allowed to be hysterical. That is not against the law.

They are wrong. And they're allowed to be wrong. And to try to convince other people to be wrong with them.

Who are you, to want to control them and deprive them of their rights?
 

diehard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
32,000
Reaction score
147
Points
63
Asking for a friend? CutDown, I think CantGetRockHard is too shy to ask you to please also add scraggly gray ponytails to the analysis. Also, if it’s not too much trouble, add in depression caused by being summarily forced to resign as a school board member. You could be saving a life here.
This is why we need CutDown. Graphic example.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
14,876
Reaction score
1,161
Points
113
And so it begins. Bear in mind these are early numbers before any recurrent lockdowns. The governors have talked themselves into a corner that will be difficult to escape from. “COVID made me do it“ is not necessarily convincing when hospitals across CA are half empty, never began to approach full capacity, and at least 256 hospital systems and clinics across the country have laid off or furloughed 1.4 million employees at last count. Cases are of course going to flare again - will Newsom shut down another two months? Or follow the Swedish model?


California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Sunday the federal government has to support state and local governments that are facing extreme budget deficits that are directly tied to the pandemic.

“We have an obligation, a moral, an ethical obligation to American citizens across this country to help support cities, states and counties,” Mr. Newsom said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. Mr. Newsom said his state is facing a $54.3 billion budget deficit that is “directly Covid-induced.”
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
16,049
Reaction score
1,711
Points
113
Several months?...
Hey, Stephanie Beekeeper missed her period after getting sick. It’s right there in Twitter. Stephanie Beekeeper. If someone needs more proof than that COVID affects the uterus then they are just in denial.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
14,876
Reaction score
1,161
Points
113
Several months?...
Yeah, that ”some” stood out. There were 12 diagnosed cases across the United States 3 months ago, including 1 person of indeterminate sex in an age group that may still menstruate. I believe these are called sea stories, war stories, tall tales. Don’t interrupt the ending.
 

scools12

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
4,651
Reaction score
586
Points
113
Hey, Stephanie Beekeeper missed her period after getting sick. It’s right there in Twitter. Stephanie Beekeeper. If someone needs more proof than that COVID affects the uterus then they are just in denial.
If Twitter doesn’t take the Tweet down that means it is true and not spreading misinformation with regards to COVID-19.

I just checked and the Tweet is still up. Therefore there is no conclusion we can come to other than COVID-19 affects the uterus.
 

Livingat45north

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
2,796
Reaction score
858
Points
113
And so it begins. Bear in mind these are early numbers before any recurrent lockdowns. The governors have talked themselves into a corner that will be difficult to escape from. “COVID made me do it“ is not necessarily convincing when hospitals across CA are half empty, never began to approach full capacity, and at least 256 hospital systems and clinics across the country have laid off or furloughed 1.4 million employees at last count. Cases are of course going to flare again - will Newsom shut down another two months? Or follow the Swedish model?


California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Sunday the federal government has to support state and local governments that are facing extreme budget deficits that are directly tied to the pandemic.

“We have an obligation, a moral, an ethical obligation to American citizens across this country to help support cities, states and counties,” Mr. Newsom said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. Mr. Newsom said his state is facing a $54.3 billion budget deficit that is “directly Covid-induced.”
How soon will the MSM start saying it's Trump's fault we kept the states locked down too long?
 

Livingat45north

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
2,796
Reaction score
858
Points
113
If Twitter doesn’t take the Tweet down that means it is true and not spreading misinformation with regards to COVID-19.

I just checked and the Tweet is still up. Therefore there is no conclusion we can come to other than COVID-19 affects the uterus.
Yes, Twitter, the ultimate source of truth :clap:
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
1,893
Reaction score
449
Points
83
Yes, Twitter, the ultimate source of truth :clap:
Actually, I think there's a co-conspiracy between YouTube, Twitter and Facebook to be the ultimate (censored) source of truth.

My brother is a big Fox News fan. He's totally frustrated by the fact that when he goes to the YouTube Fox News channel, the most prominent results that YouTube gives are CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC. And any Fox results are old moldy videos from a year ago. Seems like Google modified its YouTube search engine to be an anti-search engine (give you everything except what you asked for, as long as it's within the approved pre-censored stuff). Add to that the fact that of the remaining search-engine results, half of them are click-bait put there by unscrupulous YouTubers who give it a false title to try to get you to click, and Google does not censure these habitual click-bait artists, but rather seems to encourage them.

I think Google (possibly among others) needs to be investigated by both the FCC and the antitrust division of the Justice Department for interfering with our constitutional right of free speech, and Google should be forced to divest itself of YouTube, which should be managed by a team of politically neutral experts. Perhaps this could be a plank of the ongoing investigation of the potential need for net neutrality.
 
Last edited:

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
1,893
Reaction score
449
Points
83
<iframe >...</iframe>
Thanks for the Billy Preston reference, although I couldn't get your HTML fragment to work. Lots of great Beatles tunes wouldn't have been quite the same without Billy Preston keyboards.

I prefer this video, in honor of the upcoming season, an instrumental version of Summertime with Billy on the Hammond B3

I'd like to see some numbers crunched and you seem like you might be the only honest guy to do it. What are the number regarding the hospitalized and dead that had serious chronic disease or were at least 50 pounds overweight. Markedly obese.
I think that @bga1 has posted some numbers in the past, and it does seem that the bulk of the really bad cases have some sort of enabling disease of comorbidity or markedly obese. There's a long tail of the probability distribution that gets some young/healthy people in trouble too, and the part that nobody seems to know much about yet is, for those young/healthy that survive COVID-19, how much damage does it do to their bodies. Does it leave them in the category of the vulnerable for the next time around, perhaps now vulnerable to the ordinary flu where they weren't before.

There was one study that was posted that attempted to go into some detail, but after some GH discussion we mostly agreed that the study fell short of the mark in quality.

I really haven't seen a good source of raw data yet. But then I haven't been looking very thoroughly either, focusing more on general aspects of understanding how the coronavirus is affecting us, and why the so-called good models are actually horrible, so far anyway.

If I find some good data source, I'll try to crunch it a bit and share what I see. If anybody finds good data on that, please share so we can all give it a look.
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
1,893
Reaction score
449
Points
83
This appears to be yet one more clog in the paperwork system - this time by the FDA.

Here's some notes from the Bill Gates blog (Scanning for answers to a pandemic https://www.gatesnotes.com/Health/Seattle-Coronavirus-Assessment-Network) about this program (that the FDA is now trying to shut down because the FDA itself is too slow in processing its required paperwork). Its forerunner program discovered the first person-to-person communicated COVID-19 infection in the US (i.e., Washington state patient #1 who was probably infected by Washington state patient #0). Without (the forerunner of) this SCAN research program, it might have taken an extra 2 weeks to a month for the US to realize the seriousness of COVID-19 and get started on defensive actions against the coronavirus.

This SCAN research program was an offshoot of another Bill-Gates funded (pre-coronavirus) Seattle area research program called the Seattle Flu Study (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2008646), that was doing similar research relative to the ordinary flu, starting in 2018. That program aimed to recruit 10,000 volunteers in Seattle (to be tested for the flu) via freely available flu tests. One of the early discoveries of the study was the impact of high-intensity physical distancing measures on reducing the flu (more or less by accident when a big snowstorm shut down schools and other operations for a while).

In late January 2020, the first confirmed case of the novel coronavirus appeared in the U.S., just outside Seattle. The patient had visited Wuhan, China, the origin of the outbreak. Several weeks later, the Seattle Flu Study team started picking up signs of the coronavirus’s genetic signature in their flu study survey samples. In February, they identified the first known case of transmission in the U.S. - a teenager living outside Seattle who had not traveled to China and had no link to anyone with the virus. The Flu Study team sequenced its genome, and quickly realized that the virus had been spreading undetected for weeks.

This finding and the discovery of dozens more coronavirus cases suddenly put the Seattle Flu Study at the center of the area’s response to the coronavirus. "We were fortunate to have this existing surveillance platform and an experienced team to quickly shift their focus to the outbreak. In March, we formed the new SCAN partnership with King County’s public health agency to track the spread of COVID-19."

This article, SCAN Coronavirus Tracking Project Put On Hold (https://patch.com/washington/seattle/scan-coronavirus-tracking-project-put-hold) attempts to explain why the SCAN project was put on hold. It says that new guidance from the FDA issued on May 8th has put their work on hold. The issue is over emergency use authorization, or EUA. Previously, the Washington State Department of Health had granted SCAN its needed EUA to take and study nasal swab tests for the coronavirus. However, new guidance says EUA must also be issued by the federal government as well, meaning that until SCAN gets federal approval, it cannot continue.

SCAN has been in conversation with the FDA since March 1st and hopes to have its (federal) EUA soon. They initiated the process to authorize their lab-developed test and self-swab kit on March 23rd and, in accordance with EUA process and timeline, submitted data to secure federal authorization on April 13th.

In other words, the FDA has been sitting on their ass for over a month now since they got the needed data on April 13, and not expediting the duly submitted federal EUA application from SCAN. Another example of your (in)efficient federal government in action.
 
Last edited:

atsgopher

Active member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
521
Reaction score
27
Points
28

Honesty. How refreshing.

Now, what is the true total elsewhere?
I used to be a CPA. Real Time updates of COVID deaths counts are going to be wrong. Especially when aggregating from 50 states, not to mention smaller reporting units.

I would think the over counting would be less of a problem, and the easier one to sort out. This is simply do to a natural function of available information. Right now you can probably only figure your under count problem using analytical tools. Maybe, you could find a reliable range. Unfortunately, for reliability sake, you'd want a better top down approach. Such as, 1) federally driven data definitions. 2) Fecal viral load studies for large statistical areas. 3). Controls on counting, etc. etc. etc.

There certainly will be "stinkers." or those who died during lockdown, that will be identified later by their stench. Some will be COVID and some will be from other causes (both because of lockdown and destiny cases).

Anyways, the numbers we get are likely a decent proxy, but better data is unlikely possible Until we understand more, about what we don't know. Exepct both sides to wrongly capitalize on the challenges for political purposes.
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
1,893
Reaction score
449
Points
83
I used to be a CPA. Real Time updates of COVID deaths counts are going to be wrong. Especially when aggregating from 50 states, not to mention smaller reporting units.


I would think the over counting would be less of a problem, and the easier one to sort out. This is simply do to a natural function of available information. Right now you can probably only figure your under count problem using analytical tools. Maybe, you could find a reliable range. Unfortunately, for reliability sake, you'd want a better top down approach. Such as, 1) federally driven data definitions. 2) Fecal viral load studies for large statistical areas. 3). Controls on counting, etc. etc. etc.


There certainly will be "stinkers." or those who died during lockdown, that will be identified later by their stench. Some will be COVID and some will be from other causes (both because of lockdown and destiny cases).


Anyways, the numbers we get are likely a decent proxy, but better data is unlikely possible Until we understand more, about what we don't know. Expect both sides to wrongly capitalize on the challenges for political purposes.
Agreed that since there's a possibility of both over-counting and under-counting (for different reasons) and all the other points you mention, it's nearly impossible to get accurate counts mid-pandemic.

Maybe after all the dust settles when the pandemic is over, some accounting geniuses might be able to get more accurate numbers. But for now, we more or less just have to settle for the fact that we don't know whether the over-counting is enough to offset the under-counting, or vice versa.

Honesty. How refreshing.

Now, what is the true total elsewhere?
> Now, what is the true total elsewhere?

As noted above, we're probably not going to know for now. Just figure +/- 5% (I'm sure it's not any more accurate than that).

> Honesty. How refreshing.

You may feel refreshed if you want to.

For myself, I much prefer consistency in reporting (and then we can add-in a plus/minus estimate for error). If the rest of the states are going to report one way, then Colorado should report that way too. Even though the Colorado governor is a Dem, he is succumbing to pressure from his (apparent) buddy Trump to change the way we count, (seemingly) so that it looks like the administration is doing a better job. It remains to be seen whether Trump will pressure the CDC to enforce such a change nationwide. If he does, that will be a sad day for Data Science.

Let's face it, Trump is not a Data Scientist. He doesn't know that you ought not change your definitions as to what qualifies as what, midstream, such that grand totals (which by definition should never go down with the passage of time) actually make a discrete quantum leap downward in the data that Data Scientists need to use for analysis. If they do revise downward midstream, then each and every Data Scientist will need to implement a data patch to "fix up for Trump's ignorance of Data Science."

I for one am glad that, in spite of Colorado's shenanigans, Worldometer's data did not take a data glitch due to the Colorado re-definition, and in fact did not miss a beat. From May 5 through today (May 17), the Worldometer data for total deaths in Colorado was a non-decreasing sequence of integers (as it should be) ranging from 903 on May 5 to 1,215 on May 17.

1589762898645.png

Here's the daily Colorado deaths to go with that total deaths graph.

1589762931441.png
 
Last edited:

Livingat45north

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
2,796
Reaction score
858
Points
113
Actually, I think there's a co-conspiracy between YouTube, Twitter and Facebook to be the ultimate (censored) source of truth.
I think Google (possibly among others) needs to be investigated by both the FCC and the antitrust division of the Justice Department for interfering with our constitutional right of free speech, and Google should be forced to divest itself of YouTube, which should be managed by a team of politically neutral experts. Perhaps this could be a plank of the ongoing investigation of the potential need for net neutrality.
Socialists used to burn books to keep people from reading items they didn't agree with. Today's bookburning is the censoring going on by Google, Facebook and YouTube. If you don't learn from history, you repeat it's mistakes.

1589763178947.png
 
Top Bottom