The new Corona virus, should we worry?

From the Parkinglot

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
644
Reaction score
288
Points
63
I'm actually a little suspicious because the last 3 days have been 1,465/1,465/1,462.


That's quite peculiarly similar, must be saving a few for the weekend.

So is Dane county. Just ignore those 17,000 negative tests and look at how many positive tests we have had. Not like the % of positive tests could be affected by with holding data.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,606
Reaction score
1,488
Points
113
Here's a NYT article (not behind the paywall) that explains why we're so horrible at contact tracing.

Contact Tracing is Failing in Many States
They gloss over the most important issue - cooperation - in favor of hammering on testing. Well, you need cooperation for tracing to work, and you need behavioral modification to get cases down. In my experience and observation far too many of the professoriate and other elites grew up in upper middle class to upper class households, attended colleges that mostly exposed them to other somewhat responsible individuals, and immediately go into workplaces that further isolate them from the underbelly of American society. There is probably an under appreciation of how good theory falls apart when confronted by cultural decay, mistrust of institutions.


Even as health care workers leap over these hurdles, they are also finding that it can be difficult not just to reach people who were potentially exposed to the virus but to get them to cooperate. Sometimes there is no good phone number, and in the cellphone era, unrecognized numbers are often ignored; 25 percent of those called in Maryland don’t pick up. Others, suspicious of contact tracers or fueled by misinformation about them, decline to cooperate, a stark contrast with places like Germany where compliance with contact tracers is viewed as a civic duty.

In Florida’s Miami-Dade County, contact tracers employed by the state have reached only 18 percent of those infected over the last two weeks, according to Mayor Dan Gelber of Miami Beach; many of the others were never even called. Mr. Gelber wrote a letter to Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday decrying the state of the program.

“You think it’s a natural situation where people will say, ‘Oh of course, I’ll cooperate,’” Dr. Fauci said. “But there’s such pushback on authority, on government, on all kinds of things like that. It makes it very complicated.”
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,606
Reaction score
1,488
Points
113

So is Dane county. Just ignore those 17,000 negative tests and look at how many positive tests we have had. Not like the % of positive tests could be affected by with holding data.
Officials continue to trip over their own ****s. The scary part is there is probably genuine belief from some of them the American flavor of lockdown Lite shutdowns aren’t unproven theatrics. Some seem to really enjoy their newfound emergency powers a bit too much.
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
2,485
Reaction score
698
Points
113
At this late date, there still seems to be confusion (at least in certain places) about how to count Covid deaths. For example, look at the following from the Worldometers US notes.

First for Texas.

July 28 notes: Texas: "July 27: DSHS is now reporting COVID-19 fatality data based on death certificates. A fatality is counted as a COVID-19 fatality when the medical certifier attests on the death certificate that COVID-19 is a cause of death. Death certificate data has identified 5,713 fatalities among Texas residents, including 44 newly reported Monday. That compares with 5,038 deaths reported Sunday under the previous method."

So this seems to indicate, that before the adjustment, Texas was under-reporting deaths by 11.8%. But did they go back and correct the historical data to reflect this change in accounting? And if a person had died and their death certificate said due to Covid, why were they not reported as Covid deaths before? Was it just a matter of that there was a delay in issuing the death certificate?

July 29 notes: Texas: There has been (and currently is) a steep discrepancy in the total number of deaths reported by state and county official sources since July 27, when the Texas Department of State Health Services started counting deaths marked on death certificates as caused by COVID-19, whereas previously the state relied on local and regional public health departments to verify and report deaths. The city of Houston (representing the most notable example of such discrepancies, with Harris County reporting 685 total deaths while the state's dashboard reports 1,182 deaths) says it plans to switch to the state’s method of reporting deaths in the next few days, according to reports citing Dr. David Persse, Houston Health Authority. Counties affected are, among others: Harris, Bexar, Cameron, Galveston, Fort Bend, and Denton. Worldometer is monitoring the situation closely and trying to reconcile the conflicting reporting as best as possible pending a timely reconciliation between the two sources.

So, wait a minute. That says ("Harris County reporting 685 total deaths while the state's dashboard reports 1,182 deaths") that in Harris County alone, there had been a shortage of 497 Covid deaths (new way via death certificates vs old way, whatever that was from local sources). Wait a minute. That's +497 discrepancy in Houston alone, but only +675 discrepancy in the whole state? That seems a bit weird. It could be correct, if most of the discrepancy was in the Houston area, but throughout the rest of the state, there was a random mixture of overcounts and undercounts, so that only a +178 discrepancy in the rest of Texas. But wouldn't you think that the over/undercount would have been more uniform, statewide? Just smells like something rotten in Texas, to me.

July 30 notes: Texas: From the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS): "July 30: Cumulative fatalities have been corrected for July 27, 28 and 29. As DSHS shifted to using death certificate data to count fatalities this week, an automation error caused approximately 225 fatalities to be included that did not have COVID-19 listed as a direct cause of death. A manual quality check revealed the issue late Wednesday."

OK, so now they're saying that due to human screw-up they overcounted by 225, which has now been corrected. So all this is pretty much proof positive that, in general, our Covid death counts cannot possibly be more accurate than +/- 5%. Most likely +/- 10% or maybe even +/- 25%.

The notes also list other goof-ups in California, mostly on case counts.

So, a couple of questions. First, how can they switch, midstream, five months into this Covid crisis, from one death reporting standard to another. Not to mention, there is probably a motley assortment of counting methods among the 50 states. Could they not have agreed upon something back in January or February? This makes it incredibly hard for any data scientist to do any credible analysis on the data.

Also (and this is in 20/20 hindsight by me, of course, and probably not even yet thought about by the bean counters at the county/state/federal level), the whole architecture of the Covid case/death counting system is completely bogus from what it actually should be. What is actually needed is a national database that tags data by state, but keeps track of all known Covid patients and their status. By status, I mean, alive vs dead, still sick vs healed, in hospital or not, in ICU or not, which hospital, which state, whether death certificate processed if dead, counted as dead or not, death status updated from death certificate or not, and the timestamped record of any transitions in status. For one thing, this could prevent double-counting of deaths (such as once counted at time of death, but then counted again when the death certificate is processed). These records would be uniquely tied to the patient via social security number or other ID. Such an architecture is needed to uniquely track each Covid patient and eventually assign either a healed status or a dead status to each patient, while ensuring they are not counted twice. It could also ensure two separate variables re testing status, one to keep track of how many times they are tested (and each separate result), and another to keep track of whether any test whatsoever came back positive.

Such a good architecture for Covid data collection and analysis is, of course, not even feasible given that you have 50 states doing (maybe) 50 different things. Just wishful thinking on the part of a would-be Covid data scientist, I guess.
 
Last edited:

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
9,842
Reaction score
1,445
Points
113
MN Covid-19 Update - Saturday, Aug 1

data reported by 4pm the previous day.

Positive Cases 55,188 +731.

Health-Care workers with positive Cases 6,319 +60.

Cases No Longer Needing Isolation 48,119 +830.

Active Cases 5,463 -111.

Deaths 1,606 +6.

Deaths at Long-Term Care and Assisted Living 1,226 +3.

Patients currently Hospitalized 317 +5.

Patients currently In ICU 149 -2.

Total Tests Processed 1,040,317 +15,158.

Number of people tested 846,268 +11,914.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,606
Reaction score
1,488
Points
113
It worries me if any high level decisions are being made on GIGO EHR data. Every institution, LTCF utilizes different (terrible) software and they cannot share data. One of the ACA’s and HI-TECH acts biggest ****-ups among many.

Regarding the death certificates it seems like if COVID-19 is listed among the chain of conditions that directly contributed to the final disposition then it should be counted as a COVID death. OTOH NYC as we know wasn’t testing decedents for COVID but counting them anyway. The data is inextricably messy and that’s ok. Science is messy and not definitive by nature. There are always caveats.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
42,051
Reaction score
3,058
Points
113
It worries me if any high level decisions are being made on GIGO EHR data. Every institution, LTCF utilizes different (terrible) software and they cannot share data. One of the ACA’s and HI-TECH acts biggest ****-ups among many.

Regarding the death certificates it seems like if COVID-19 is listed among the chain of conditions that directly contributed to the final disposition then it should be counted as a COVID death. OTOH NYC as we know wasn’t testing decedents for COVID but counting them anyway. The data is inextricably messy and that’s ok. Science is messy and not definitive by nature. There are always caveats.
Here is the tricky bit. This is not a debate over whether coronavirus is bad. It is. The issue is how much should we break down our economy and our society to prevent these deaths and is what we are doing really effective at all. When you say :"if COVID-19 is listed among the chain of conditions that directly contributed to the final disposition then it should be counted as a COVID death." I agree, this is what is happening. The problem with this is that you don't sort out the difference between people who were going to die soon anyway and those who were truly dying solely because they got hit with covid. The CDC sheds some light on this because they have a column in the death count that is only covid + pneumonia deaths. This category sits at about 60,000 deaths. A lot. However this is a whole different kettle of fish than 150,000 + deaths and 60k is not something you shut the economy down for.

So I think that clarity in these statistics is extremely important in decision making
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,606
Reaction score
1,488
Points
113
Here is the tricky bit. This is not a debate over whether coronavirus is bad. It is. The issue is how much should we break down our economy and our society to prevent these deaths and is what we are doing really effective at all. When you say :"if COVID-19 is listed among the chain of conditions that directly contributed to the final disposition then it should be counted as a COVID death." I agree, this is what is happening. The problem with this is that you don't sort out the difference between people who were going to die soon anyway and those who were truly dying solely because they got hit with covid. The CDC sheds some light on this because they have a column in the death count that is only covid + pneumonia deaths. This category sits at about 60,000 deaths. A lot. However this is a whole different kettle of fish than 150,000 + deaths and 60k is not something you shut the economy down for.

So I think that clarity in these statistics is extremely important in decision making
COVID-19 causes systemic multi-organ failure, not just pneumonia.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
9,842
Reaction score
1,445
Points
113
Ah, the "people who were going to die soon, anyway" argument.

how about this: (hypothetical situation)

I have terminal cancer. I am going to die. but, BGA shoots and kills me. He goes to court and argues that "he would have died anyway." the court responds that, it doesn't matter what might have killed me in the future. the fact is that the immediate cause of my death was being shot. and BGA gets convicted and goes to prison.

If someone gets covid and dies, then covid is the immediate cause of death - underlying conditions notwithstanding.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
17,077
Reaction score
2,411
Points
113
If someone gets covid and dies, then covid is the immediate cause of death - underlying conditions notwithstanding.
I couldn’t agree more. If COVID takes away even a week of someone’s time that is a tragedy and COVID is the cause.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
42,051
Reaction score
3,058
Points
113
COVID-19 causes systemic multi-organ failure, not just pneumonia.
That's true. The real question is how many would have died soon anyway. The answer is most of them. Sad that they have to die a week too early or a month too early. Definitely not something that you shut the economy down for and cause a lot of major secondary issues for. Thus the need for more clarity on that issue.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
42,051
Reaction score
3,058
Points
113
Ah, the "people who were going to die soon, anyway" argument.

how about this: (hypothetical situation)

I have terminal cancer. I am going to die. but, BGA shoots and kills me. He goes to court and argues that "he would have died anyway." the court responds that, it doesn't matter what might have killed me in the future. the fact is that the immediate cause of my death was being shot. and BGA gets convicted and goes to prison.

If someone gets covid and dies, then covid is the immediate cause of death - underlying conditions notwithstanding.
How about this:
You shut the economy down. People lose their jobs, become depressed commit suicide or have a drug overdose. You are at fault.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
9,842
Reaction score
1,445
Points
113

MN Covid-19 Update (8-2-20).

data reports by 4pm the previous day.

Positive cases 55,947 +769.

Health-care workers with positive cases 6,383 +64.

Cases No Longer Needing Isolation 48,847 +728.

Active cases 5,486 +23.

Deaths 1,614 +8.

Deaths at Long-Term Care and Assisted Living 1,231 +5.

Patients currently Hospitalized 302 -15.

Patients currently In ICU 149 - no change.

Total Tests processed 1,054,962 +15,174.

Number of people tested 858,341 +12,073.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
9,842
Reaction score
1,445
Points
113
A Dem congressman has CV19. How is that possible? Democrats use masks. (sarcasm for you lefty idiots)


If you read the story you linked - the Dem congressman was at a hearing with Louie Gohmert. After he found out Gohmert tested positive, the Dem had himself tested, and he came up positive, too.

The implication is that Gohmert spread the virus to a colleague.

So you are ripping "lefty idiots" after posting a story that implies a Republican member of Congress was spreading the virus to other members.

And, to the best of my knowledge, you take the mask off when you are speaking. (I know that is the State Dept of health policy in MN for public meetings, because the school superintendent read it at a recent meeting.)
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,027
Reaction score
2,176
Points
113
If you read the story you linked - the Dem congressman was at a hearing with Louie Gohmert. After he found out Gohmert tested positive, the Dem had himself tested, and he came up positive, too.

The implication is that Gohmert spread the virus to a colleague.

So you are ripping "lefty idiots" after posting a story that implies a Republican member of Congress was spreading the virus to other members.

And, to the best of my knowledge, you take the mask off when you are speaking. (I know that is the State Dept of health policy in MN for public meetings, because the school superintendent read it at a recent meeting.)
I’m not “ripping” anyone. I’m pointing out that people that supposedly take mitigating steps contract the virus, just as people that allegedly don’t take mitigation seriously. The note about “sarcasm” was to ensure that howie and company didn’t take the post that Dems get CV as a serious comment.

You’ve jumped to the conclusion, without any real evidence, that Gohmert spread it to Grijalva. You don’t know that Grijalva may have spread it to Gohmert or that neither has anything to do with each other. Just as people have attempted to conclude, without evidence, that Herman Cain died b/c he contracted the virus at the Trump rally or Gohmert contracted the virus b/c its alleged his isn’t careful about wearing a mask.

Did Herman Cain only attend a Trump rally or did he go to a multitude of other places in the days or weeks around the Trump rally?

There is absolutely no way to conclude the above assumed conclusions except that it fits a narrative that the left and the media want to perpetuate. Apparently, the way to explain how Democrats contract the virus is to claim that they were around Republicans with no evidence to prove such a claim.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
42,051
Reaction score
3,058
Points
113
If you read the story you linked - the Dem congressman was at a hearing with Louie Gohmert. After he found out Gohmert tested positive, the Dem had himself tested, and he came up positive, too.

The implication is that Gohmert spread the virus to a colleague.

So you are ripping "lefty idiots" after posting a story that implies a Republican member of Congress was spreading the virus to other members.

And, to the best of my knowledge, you take the mask off when you are speaking. (I know that is the State Dept of health policy in MN for public meetings, because the school superintendent read it at a recent meeting.)
And that of course, is your non-political view of it. As always.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,606
Reaction score
1,488
Points
113
Carlson is spot on here.

We don’t know if HCQ is effective. It can even be rarely harmful for some, or with high dose or prolonged use. There are ongoing studies and evidence is decidedly mixed and not really encouraging thus far. That’s why numerous studies are done with varying methodology and populations. Youtube, Twitter, google censoring legitimate outlets like Medcram and others for even DISCUSSING hydroxychloroquine should be scary for everyone. These are not nutcases, most likely. Laypeople thinking they have all the answers OTOH....

Furthermore, anyone practicing a major, or less major, religion really has no business criticizing Immanuel‘s past statements on psychosomatic illness and demons...

 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
2,485
Reaction score
698
Points
113
How about this:
You shut the economy down. People lose their jobs, become depressed commit suicide or have a drug overdose. You are at fault.
George Floyd lost his job. It seems highly likely that George Floyd died of a heart attack that was caused by a drug overdose (and contrary to popular opinion, the stupid cop didn't actually cause his death, although he certainly did make for good optics that the BLM organization could leverage to instigate massive riots). Pending medical findings to be brought forth at the trial, maybe his death should also be chalked up to Covid - at least according to the depression/suicide/drug-overdose theory.
 
Top Bottom