The new Corona virus, should we worry?

GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
8,053
Reaction score
1,393
Points
113
A) Automatically discount anyone's opinion if they compare one percentage to another and use a 3rd to express the difference. This is why basis points were created.

B) This is such stupid framing. "Donald Trump has been President for 4 years and <pick any of 1000 metrics> is <worse than what it was before>" You have to control for other variables and compare to other places.
It's relevant data, not an opinion. I can see why you don't understand.
 

GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
8,053
Reaction score
1,393
Points
113
Kinda seems like you’re asking for real proof for what I’m suggesting while not needing it for what you’re suggesting. And I guess I was grouping college gatherings into the school category.

I’m just trying to understand the difference between close contact at a party or work and close contact at a bar or restaurant.
The difference is proximity to people and the length of time you're with those people.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
17,501
Reaction score
2,707
Points
113
I’m just trying to understand the difference between close contact at a party or work and close contact at a bar or restaurant.
I’m not fearful of COVID, but I fully respect the risk it brings. I wouldn’t go to a large party or crowded bar. However, I go to restaurants every weekend. TBH, I don’t find them unsafe at all. The State has them close every other table so other than my server, who is wearing a mask, I don’t ever come within 6 feet of anyone else (other than those I came with). In fact, I would argue going to a restaurant is safer than shopping at Target or Home Depot.
 

Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,497
Reaction score
161
Points
63
Who said that a mask mandate would prevent cases from ever rising again?

It causes some effect amount greater than zero of reducing spread. Anything, is better than nothing. Exact quantification is nearly impossible, and completely unnecessary.

The only objective fact: without the mask mandate, the case rise would have been some amount steeper.
Doubt it. Masks give people a false sense of security, resulting in more careless actions like touching their face every 5 seconds.;)
 
Last edited:

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,926
Reaction score
1,649
Points
113
Who said that a mask mandate would prevent cases from ever rising again?

It causes some effect amount greater than zero of reducing spread. Anything, is better than nothing. Exact quantification is nearly impossible, and completely unnecessary.

The only objective fact: without the mask mandate, the case rise would have been some amount steeper.
Maybe, and plausible for a variety of reasons but we don’t know this as there aren’t any RCTs...published. I have witnessed far too many people wearing ridiculous single layer cloth masks, gaiters, and the ubiquitous valved neoprene type masks...😐 violating the three foot rule to say nothing of the six foot rule. They forget to distance. This is what some public health people were worried about when they didn‘t recommend masks prior to recommending them. False sense of security, etc. Unfortunately the messaging has been so poor it’s usually masks first, distancing second now. We don’t have enough surgical masks in this country?
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,926
Reaction score
1,649
Points
113
Oh I’m glad you posted this. I do have some thoughts on it but I won’t have time to post them for a while. I would like to call on our resident numerologist @CutDownTheNet to comment on the aspect of statistical power in this study. I was excited about this trial at first but when I looked at the study design I was immediately underwhelmed.

Some relevant links:


Given nobody has seen the actual study numbers that’s an interesting preemptive statistical strike. Even if flawed, is a potentially flawed study better or worse than the “well, could or would have been worse” narrative around face coverings.

Given the enormous stakes one would think we’d have better papers on mask mandates and other NP interventions by now? Maybe better protocols.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
17,501
Reaction score
2,707
Points
113
Unfortunately the messaging has been so poor it’s usually masks first, distancing second now.
I’m pro-mask, but think you have hit the nail on the head here with a big issue. Social distancing is a far more proven measure - but it is almost forgotten in the “mask debate.” On here and everywhere else.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
17,698
Reaction score
3,322
Points
113
Maybe, and plausible for a variety of reasons but we don’t know this as there aren’t any RCTs...published. I have witnessed far too many people wearing ridiculous single layer cloth masks, gaiters, and the ubiquitous valved neoprene type masks...😐 violating the three foot rule to say nothing of the six foot rule. They forget to distance. This is what some public health people were worried about when they didn‘t recommend masks prior to recommending them. False sense of security, etc. Unfortunately the messaging has been so poor it’s usually masks first, distancing second now. We don’t have enough surgical masks in this country?
All fair points, not wrong.

As you understood, my point was, even if every mask wearer chooses a poor design and doesn't wear it "properly", then maybe you're talking about a 1.3% reduction instead of a 7.8% reduction. Still more than zero, net. So yes that includes the hypothetical false sense of security.

Maybe if masks were never a thing, the messaging/advertising on distancing would have been more intense and better followed. That is also fair.

My notion above is based on distancing emphasis being the same as it has been so far.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
17,698
Reaction score
3,322
Points
113
The messaging around masks has never been "if you wear a mask, you get to do whatever you want".

Masks have always been pushed in addition to distancing.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
26,468
Reaction score
1,831
Points
113
I’m pro-mask, but think you have hit the nail on the head here with a big issue. Social distancing is a far more proven measure - but it is almost forgotten in the “mask debate.” On here and everywhere else.
Large gatherings is talked about a lot. The lack of social distancing is happening at things like weddings, churches, sporting events and rallies.
 

RahSkiUMah

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Messages
345
Reaction score
343
Points
63
Given nobody has seen the actual study numbers that’s an interesting preemptive statistical strike. Even if flawed, is a potentially flawed study better or worse than the “well, could or would have been worse” narrative around face coverings.

Given the enormous stakes one would think we’d have better papers on mask mandates and other NP interventions by now? Maybe better protocols.
I’ll get there when I have a chance but essentially look at Denmark’s infection rate and do a back of the napkin calculation as to the expected number of infections they would expect to pick up in a 3-4 week study window.

Is a potentially flawed study better than nothing? What are your thoughts? Are potentially flawed studies on HCQ better than nothing?

NP interventions are notoriously hard to study because of the unknown range of compliance levels, usually self reported. Does an RCT on hand washing exist? I’m sure there will be some retrospective epidemiologic studies but we don’t tend to put a lot of weight in those. Further, I know your stance is the science community has failed to communicate with the general public, how should we expect the science community to communicate a potentially flawed study to the community? Do you think they can out communicate Twitter, politicians, and politica commentators?

Look at how the left seized on the n=1 college student with heart issues while many cardiologists did not share those concerns.
 
Last edited:

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,926
Reaction score
1,649
Points
113
I’ll get there when I have a chance but essentially look at Denmark’s infection rate and do a back of the napkin calculation as to the expected number of infections they would expect to pick up in a 3-4 week study window.

Is a potentially flawed study better than nothing? What are your thoughts? Are potentially flawed studies on HCQ better than nothing?

NP interventions are notoriously hard to study because of the unknown range of compliance levels, usually self reported. Does an RCT on hand washing exist? I’m sure there will be some retrospective epidemiologic studies but we don’t tend to put a lot of weight in those. Further, I know your stance is the science community has failed to communicate with the general public, how should we expect the science community to communicate a potentially flawed study to the community? Do you think they can out communicate Twitter, politicians, and politica commentators?

Look at how the left seized on the n=1 college student with heart issues while many cardiologists did not share those concerns.
We see published, flawed studies with methodology and sampling issues all the time including those re: masks... Fair to pick apart the shortcomings. The question should be does it add any value at all to the body of knowledge.

Im a mask supporter, btw, but implementation matters.
 
Last edited:

RahSkiUMah

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Messages
345
Reaction score
343
Points
63
We see published, flawed studies with methodology and sampling issues all the time including masks... Fair to pick apart the shortcomings. The question should be does it add any value at all to the knowledge base or body of knowledge.

Im a mask supporter, btw, but implementation matters.
For sure implementation matters, masks won’t save us from bad behaviors. And I value your input even when we disagree.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
17,698
Reaction score
3,322
Points
113
Large gatherings is talked about a lot. The lack of social distancing is happening at things like weddings, churches, sporting events and rallies.
The key being: indoors or having an indoor component.

Unlike this summer's protests, which have largely been void of spreading events (as far as I'm aware).
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
17,698
Reaction score
3,322
Points
113
I’ll get there when I have a chance but essentially look at Denmark’s infection rate and do a back of the napkin calculation as to the expected number of infections they would expect to pick up in a 3-4 week study window.

Is a potentially flawed study better than nothing? What are your thoughts? Are potentially flawed studies on HCQ better than nothing?

NP interventions are notoriously hard to study because of the unknown range of compliance levels, usually self reported. Does an RCT on hand washing exist? I’m sure there will be some retrospective epidemiologic studies but we don’t tend to put a lot of weight in those. Further, I know your stance is the science community has failed to communicate with the general public, how should we expect the science community to communicate a potentially flawed study to the community? Do you think they can out communicate Twitter, politicians, and politica commentators?

Look at how the left seized on the n=1 college student with heart issues while many cardiologists did not share those concerns.
Cardiologists aren't scientists.

They go to med school to learn to prescribe medicines. As doctors do. (they are often pretentious though, especially the Twitter litigators)
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,013
Reaction score
1,601
Points
113
Whoa - I checked the numbers twice. The positive test rate is accurate based on the number of positive cases reported and number of tests processed. Hospitalizations going up again.

MN Covid-19 Update - Tues, Oct 27

data reported by 4pm the previous day.

Positive Cases 137,146 +2,167. (positive test rate 14.7%)

Health-Care workers with positive cases 13,759 +185.

Cases no longer needing isolation 122,100 +1,679.

Active Cases 12,692 +459.

Deaths 2,354 +15.

Deaths at long-term care and assisted living 1,644 +4.

Patients currently Hospitalized 658 +44. cumulative 9,729 +141.

Patients currently In ICU 165 +16. cumulative 2,589 +31.

Total tests processed 2,698,113 +14,781.

Number of people tested 1,791,688 +7,755.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
17,501
Reaction score
2,707
Points
113
Large gatherings is talked about a lot. The lack of social distancing is happening at things like weddings, churches, sporting events and rallies.
Talking about large gatherings is not the same as talking about social distancing. If you think lack of social distancing is only an issue at large gatherings, you are dilusional. My point remains - the focus on masks over social distancing is a big issue - and this is from a pro-mask guy.
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
725
Points
113
Hell, let’s do the whole European Union plus the UK vs the US. The EU that did so well according to the left.

View attachment 9988

View attachment 9987
I eyeballed the latest numbers from these two graphs, and used that to compute the properly lagged latest Marginal Case Fatality Rate for the US and the EU ...

EU Marginal CFR = 1.7 K / 72 K = 2.361 %
US Marginal CFR = 800 / 44 K = 1.818 %

So the US Marginal CFR is about 0.77 X the EU Marginal CFR.

That could mean that US Covid treatments are a little bit better than in the EU. Or, it could just mean that in the US we are testing more such that we are detecting more cases, so that the denominator is a little bit bigger in the US Marginal CFR calculation. So we can't draw any real conclusions from this observation.

However, it does look as if both cases and deaths are shooting up faster in the EU than in the US. This too is hard to be certain of, just because the two datas are not drawn to the same scale, so that it could be an illusion that the slope of the EU curves looks steeper than the slope of the US curves.

In any event, the phase of the US pandemic is delayed a few weeks relative to that in the EU.
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
725
Points
113
Cases, cases, cases.... More meaningless drivel. I wonder if "# of cases" will still be a thing after November 3?
> I wonder if "# of cases" will still be a thing after November 3?

No. The issue will be, "How many more votes for Candidate A do we need to find in the back room before we can declare A the victor over Candidate B.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
2,900
Reaction score
1,163
Points
113
Is Kristi Noem still the darling of Fox News?

Active CasesPopulationActive Cases Per Million
MN12,545.005.6396322,224.44
WI41,103.005.8224347,059.42
ND6,446.000.7620628,458.63
IA26,937.003.155078,537.69
SD11,061.000.88465912,503.12
Sturgis for the win!!!!!
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
725
Points
113
Now let's try again, except this time we'll control for population

There's something wrong with this graph. Either that, or there's something wrong with the previous graph.

Even after accounting for that this is only a graph on the 50 to 56 most recent days, the shape of the EU curve is not the same shape as the shape of the EU curve in the last graph.

The suspect part is the last couple data points.

Perhaps these are two new days worth of data. But even so, natural phenomena simply don't make a sharp 90-degree turn in their curve in the short span of two days, when it was trending up sharply for so long.

The likely explanation for this glitch is bad data. A gigantic decrease in mortality over 2 days is very unlikely. A gigantic increase in population over 2 days is equally unlikely.
 

balds

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
2,505
Reaction score
212
Points
63
Minnesota is rapidly approaching Sweden in deaths per capita.

MN: 2354 Covid Deaths - 0.0417% of the population.
Sweden 5918 Covid Deaths - 0.0578% of the population

Covid Deaths the past 15 days:

MN - 224 (406 when normalized for pop. vs. Sweden)
Sweden 40.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
17,698
Reaction score
3,322
Points
113
Minnesota is rapidly approaching Sweden in deaths per capita.

MN: 2354 Covid Deaths - 0.0417% of the population.
Sweden 5918 Covid Deaths - 0.0578% of the population

Covid Deaths the past 15 days:

MN - 224 (406 when normalized for pop. vs. Sweden)
Sweden 40.
Do Minnesota and Sweden have the exact same border control/immigration quarentine measures in place?
 
Top Bottom