Has the Corona Virus infected anyone you know?

[FirefightnRick]

2 hours ago, CMJ said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-kills-more-americans-in-one-month-than-the-flu-kills-in-one-year/?fbclid=IwAR0bRxn6EPYBeQiJ8dlaUgPqFMjS4m-sH5Yl0wko8Ad6hHwNeVzRYy_Lz2w

 

Note The National Review has never been accused as a left leaning publication given William Buckley Jr. started it.

 

Quote

........He pointed to the fact that the IMHE model from the University of Washington....

...... Indeed, the IMHE model is making an estimate of the death toll only for a first wave of infections,

Its the IHME,...Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation

 

As for accuracy of the information in the article and in regard to this quote.......

 

Not only does the new coronavirus have the potential to infect many more people than the seasonal flu does, it appears to kill a greater percentage of those infected

 

@greenminer linked HEREto the latest research done on representative sampling of antibody testing by USC and L.A. County Health that shows a 28 to 55 percent increase of persons with the antibody than the more than 7,994 confirmed cases.

 

 

USC-LA County Study: Early Results of Antibody Testing Suggest Number of COVID-19 Infections Far Exceeds Number of Confirmed Cases in Los Angeles County Watch the L.A. County Department of Public Health briefing livestream at 1 p.m. on Facebook.  Contact: Leigh Hopper, USC Media Relations, uscnews@usc.edu or (213) 740-2215; Carl Kemp, LA County Public Health Communications, ckemp@ph.lacounty.gov or  (323) 365-7260 Los Angeles (April 20, 2020) – USC and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (Public Health) today released preliminary results from a collaborative scientific study that suggests infections from the new coronavirus are far more widespread – and the fatality rate much lower — in L.A. County than previously thought......

Edited April 22, 2020 by FirefightnRick

[CMJ]

I guess you missed the part that said in a month more people died of the coronavirus than the flu in an average year.  And that's with massive social distancing measures.

[FirefightnRick]

2 hours ago, CMJ said:

I guess you missed the part that said in a month more people died of the coronavirus than the flu in an average year.  And that's with massive social distancing measures.

No,...I didn’t, but give limited credit to a statement we have no idea of its accuracy at this time.  But I especially didn’t miss this part wich is more to what I was responding to.

Quote

...”

Not only does the new coronavirus have the potential to infect many more people than the seasonal flu does, it appears to kill a greater percentage of those infected.

 

 

Edited April 22, 2020 by FirefightnRick

[keith]

12 hours ago, greenminer said:

Anyone else wonder if some of these people sharing the stage with Trump just say random, false shit (in line with whatever Trump is saying) because they're afraid of backlash from the President?

Not really.  If they do (or they even think about it), then they have no business being on the stage in the first place. 

[CMJ]

8 hours ago, FirefightnRick said:

No,...I didn’t, but give limited credit to a statement we have no idea of its accuracy at this time.  But I especially didn’t miss this part wich is more to what I was responding to.

 

 

Well, in a month it has killed more than a normal flu does.  It may not kill 4% - but it certainly kills more than 0.1%.

 

And again, if anything the deaths worldwide have been under reported so far.

Edited April 22, 2020 by CMJ

[FirefightnRick]

18 minutes ago, CMJ said:

Well, in a month it has killed more than a normal flu does.

And due to spastic coding guidelines we have no idea how many have died of it at this time.

 

Rick

[CMJ]

9 minutes ago, FirefightnRick said:

And due to spastic coding guidelines we have no idea how many have died of it at this time.

 

Rick

Yeah, it's probably more!  It certainly is for the flu every year.  They never come out with final figures till months/years later.

[keith]

I thought we decided that this is not the flu, so I'm not sure why we keep comparing cases, deaths, mortality rates, etc. to seasonal flu (which usually has multiple strains floating around each year).  I think this comparison all started because the same health experts we look to today for answers originally said something to the effect that most people who become infected will experience mild, flu-like symptoms.  They were trying to be helpful at the time, but probably wish they could take that back.

The one thing we have all learned during this is that data and statistics around this have pretty wide ranges - even for seasonal flu which you would think we had a pretty good handle on by now, but everything seems to be based on estimates.

According to the CDC, "While flu deaths in children are reported to CDC, flu deaths in adults are not nationally notifiable. In order to monitor influenza related deaths in all age groups, CDC tracks pneumonia and influenza (P&I)-attributed deaths through the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Mortality Reporting System. This system tracks the proportion of death certificates processed that list pneumonia or influenza as the underlying or contributing cause of death. This system provides an overall indication of whether flu-associated deaths are elevated, but does not provide an exact number of how many people died from flu."

[CMJ]

5 minutes ago, keith said:

I thought we decided that this is not the flu, so I'm not sure why we keep comparing cases, deaths, mortality rates, etc. to seasonal flu (which usually has multiple strains floating around each year).  I think this comparison all started because the same health experts we look to today for answers originally said something to the effect that most people who become infected will experience mild, flu-like symptoms.  They were trying to be helpful at the time, but probably wish they could take that back.

The one thing we have all learned during this is that data and statistics around this have pretty wide ranges - even for seasonal flu which you would think we had a pretty good handle on by now, but everything seems to be based on estimates.

According to the CDC, "While flu deaths in children are reported to CDC, flu deaths in adults are not nationally notifiable. In order to monitor influenza related deaths in all age groups, CDC tracks pneumonia and influenza (P&I)-attributed deaths through the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Mortality Reporting System. This system tracks the proportion of death certificates processed that list pneumonia or influenza as the underlying or contributing cause of death. This system provides an overall indication of whether flu-associated deaths are elevated, but does not provide an exact number of how many people died from flu."

I refer to it because I still see people trying to downplay this as just a bad influenza.

[MCMLXXX]

Here is a useful tool to see how individual States are doing.

https://rt.live/?fbclid=IwAR1CqtIFDmf_ThLgLzbhFAXNB4TGs64o2WDe26Klxi8yRVULTVO7iBy7vLE

[keith]

13 minutes ago, MCMLXXX said:

Here is a useful tool to see how individual States are doing.

https://rt.live/?fbclid=IwAR1CqtIFDmf_ThLgLzbhFAXNB4TGs64o2WDe26Klxi8yRVULTVO7iBy7vLE

Good stuff.  Thanks for sharing this.  NY trend looks encouraging.  CT (my state) did a recent "true-up" in the way Covid-related cases are reported so had an abnormal spike that needs to normalize.

[FirefightnRick]

1 hour ago, keith said:

I thought we decided that this is not the flu, so I'm not sure why we keep comparing cases, deaths, mortality rates, etc. to seasonal flu (which usually has multiple strains floating around each year).  I think this comparison all started because the same health experts we look to today for answers originally said something to the effect that most people who become infected will experience mild, flu-like symptoms.  They were trying to be helpful at the time, but probably wish they could take that back.

The one thing we have all learned during this is that data and statistics around this have pretty wide ranges - even for seasonal flu which you would think we had a pretty good handle on by now, but everything seems to be based on estimates.

According to the CDC, "While flu deaths in children are reported to CDC, flu deaths in adults are not nationally notifiable. In order to monitor influenza related deaths in all age groups, CDC tracks pneumonia and influenza (P&I)-attributed deaths through the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Mortality Reporting System. This system tracks the proportion of death certificates processed that list pneumonia or influenza as the underlying or contributing cause of death. This system provides an overall indication of whether flu-associated deaths are elevated, but does not provide an exact number of how many people died from flu."

True.  But what invalidates the (previous) current standing tracking system is the latest directive from the NVSS instructing all certifying officials to “Assume” Cov-19 and to go ahead and code the death Cov-19 for now.  

Is this common?  With P&I coding do certifying officials usually “Assume”?   If it is common then why did the NVSS have to send out that directive back on April 2nd reminding them to?

 

Rick

Edited April 22, 2020 by FirefightnRick

[FirefightnRick]

Researchers Predict Potential Spread and Seasonality for COVID-19 Based on Climate Where Virus Appears to Thrive

https://www.medschool.umaryland.edu/news/2020/Researchers-Predict-Potential-Spread-and-Seasonality-for-COVID-19-Based-on-Climate-Where-Virus-Appears-to-Thrive.html

 

 

Rick

[ColoradoEagle]

15 hours ago, FirefightnRick said:

As for Trump, he’s been warning us about China since the 90’s.  And he’s tried to restrict travel into the U.S. since year one.  So how hilarious is it that the hypocritical  left now thinks he didn’t do it soon enough.  Not sure what else there is to say about that?

 

[greenminer]

3 hours ago, keith said:

then they have no business being on the stage in the first place. 

Have you been watching who our voters elect?  Don't answer that.   I know you have.

[keith]

10 minutes ago, FirefightnRick said:

True.  But what invalidates the (previous) current standing tracking system is the latest directive from the NVSS instructing all certifying officials that “when in doubt” to go ahead and code the death Cov-19 for now.  

Is this common?  With P&I coding do certifying officials usually just guess “when in doubt”?   If it is common then why did the NVSS have to send out that directive back on April 2nd reminding them to?

 

Rick

We have not experienced a pandemic like this (at least not in my lifetime) so it's hard to say, but my initial reaction is that it does not seem normal or common. This is one of those areas where we need the media that may have access to the officials that made this directive ask them for the rationale behind it.  

Here's what they say:  "Coronavirus disease deaths are identified using the ICD–10 code U07.1. Deaths are coded to U07.1 when coronavirus disease 2019 or COVID-19 are reported as a cause that contributed to death on the death certificate. These can include laboratory confirmed cases, as well as cases without laboratory confirmation. If the certifier suspects COVID-19 or determines it was likely (e.g., the circumstances were compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty), they can report COVID-19 as “probable” or “presumed” on the death certificate (5, 6)."

Looking at some of the tables at the NVSS that shows COVID-19 coded deaths to deaths from all causes is sobering (the Deaths from All Causes column in particular).  They refer to the COVID-19 counts as provisional as they obviously expect to adjust the data at some point and note that the numbers are lagging and only based on the coded death certificates they have received.

When you look at the Deaths from All Causes compared to COVID-19 Deaths and the % of expected deaths by state, you can see why New York (New York City in particular has been so hard hit.  Total death volume is almost twice the expected amount and may get worse as the data comes in and is compiled.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/

I think this may be the specific guidance (reference 5 above).  I read through it, but I did not pick up on were it says if in doubt...at least not those specific words.  I'm not a medical professional (obviously!), so maybe there is some reading between the lines that doctors pick up on the guidance that says that, but I didn't see it.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf

 

[FirefightnRick]

22 minutes ago, keith said:

We have not experienced a pandemic like this (at least not in my lifetime) so it's hard to say, but my initial reaction is that it does not seem normal or common. This is one of those areas where we need the media that may have access to the officials that made this directive ask them for the rationale behind it.  

Here's what they say:  "Coronavirus disease deaths are identified using the ICD–10 code U07.1. Deaths are coded to U07.1 when coronavirus disease 2019 or COVID-19 are reported as a cause that contributed to death on the death certificate. These can include laboratory confirmed cases, as well as cases without laboratory confirmation. If the certifier suspects COVID-19 or determines it was likely (e.g., the circumstances were compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty), they can report COVID-19 as “probable” or “presumed” on the death certificate (5, 6)."

Looking at some of the tables at the NVSS that shows COVID-19 coded deaths to deaths from all causes is sobering (the Deaths from All Causes column in particular).  They refer to the COVID-19 counts as provisional as they obviously expect to adjust the data at some point and note that the numbers are lagging and only based on the coded death certificates they have received.

When you look at the Deaths from All Causes compared to COVID-19 Deaths and the % of expected deaths by state, you can see why New York (New York City in particular has been so hard hit.  Total death volume is almost twice the expected amount and may get worse as the data comes in and is compiled.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/

I think this may be the specific guidance (reference 5 above).  I read through it, but I did not pick up on were it says if in doubt...at least not those specific words.  I'm not a medical professional (obviously!), so maybe there is some reading between the lines that doctors pick up on the guidance that says that, but I didn't see it.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf

 

My mistake as I typed that off the top of my head and had corrected it before you responded..  The correct word in the directive is “Assumed”.  

 

 

Rick

Edited April 22, 2020 by FirefightnRick

[keith]

17 minutes ago, FirefightnRick said:

My mistake as I typed that off the top of my head and had corrected it before you responded..  The correct word in the directive is “Assumed”.  

 

 

Rick

I suspect this is what caused Connecticut to true-up its numbers.  

[Coffee and TV]

28,000 missing deaths 

[FirefightnRick]

1 hour ago, ColoradoEagle said:

 

Nope, no straw man here.  Just a response to a question by C&TV  HERE that asked...

...”Rick, any thoughts on Trump not closing off travel to Europe soon enough, because it's more likely that's where the outbreak in the Northeast US”....

 

Rick

[ColoradoEagle]

1 minute ago, FirefightnRick said:

Nope, no straw man here.  Just a response to a question by C&TV  HERE that asked...

...”Rick, any thoughts on Trump not closing off travel to Europe soon enough, because it's more likely that's where the outbreak in the Northeast US”....

Still a Straw Man.

C&TV asked:

Quote

Rick, any thoughts on Trump not closing off travel to Europe soon enough, because it's more likely that's where the outbreak in the Northeast US came from. 

To which you responded:

Quote

As for Trump, he’s been warning us about China since the 90’s.  And he’s tried to restrict travel into the U.S. since year one.  So how hilarious is it that the hypocritical  left now thinks he didn’t do it soon enough.  Not sure what else there is to say about that?

Did China annex Europe? And then you take the argument that no one is making and basically paint 50-60% of the country as being hypocritical. Fancy.

[Coffee and TV]

5 minutes ago, ColoradoEagle said:

Still a Straw Man.

C&TV asked:

To which you responded:

Did China annex Europe? And then you take the argument that no one is making and basically paint 50-60% of the country as being hypocritical. Fancy.

"Warned us about China" 

Literally had every item with his or his daughter's name on it manufactured in China for the last 20 years. And the whole "he shut down flights to China" is a silly defense considering that clearly didn't stop the U.S. from having almost 25% of worldwide deaths at the moment. 

[keith]

48 minutes ago, Coffee and TV said:

"Warned us about China" 

Literally had every item with his or his daughter's name on it manufactured in China for the last 20 years. And the whole "he shut down flights to China" is a silly defense considering that clearly didn't stop the U.S. from having almost 25% of worldwide deaths at the moment. 

This may be one of the things that comes along with a free and open society (relatively speaking).

I'm sure just about everyone that was in the decision-making process across the globe would say (if not publicly, then privately) if I knew then, what I know now or if I had better information at the time, I would have done things differently.  But that almost always true when working with imperfect data.

When a reporter asks the question, "Should you have done something sooner?" or however they put is, it isn't really an honest question.  They are trying to illicit a reaction or they want a sound bite or something they can put in a headline.  To tell the truth, the state of modern "journalism" has become nauseating.

I don't have the exact timeline on the top of my head, but for argument sake, I believe Trump did curtail travel from Europe and then the UK before the rest of Europe began curtailing travel within the EU or travel into the EU.  So, if my memory is correct, he acted before all those other leaders who then followed suit.  Perhaps some of the EU counties acted earlier, I don't know, but I seem to recall that the US was the first actor in this respect.

If social distancing is a good thing, then should the same be said for country distancing regardless of when it was done?  Who knows?  

Edited April 22, 2020 by keith

[ColoradoEagle]

4 minutes ago, keith said:

When a reporter asks the question, "Should you have done something sooner?" or however they put is, it isn't really an honest question.  They are trying to illicit a reaction or they want a sound bite or something they can put in a headline.  To tell the truth, the state of modern "journalism" has become nauseating.

Well, it is an honest question when we can compare the reaction and planning of the US government to several other first world nations that saw nowhere near the case and death count per million that we're seeing.

Even if it was a 'gotcha' question, which it absolutely is not, a lucid leader would reflect on the missteps that have been made up to that point, what can be corrected and what cannot, and what the plan is going forward. When the answer to everything is, "You wouldn't believe how fast/prepared/amazing we've been at responding to this," but the facts tell a different story, then you have to ask yourself whether you believe someone trying to cover their ass, or the dead bodies piling up every day.

That's why he spends 90% of his "briefings" throwing blame at anyone he can think of: Obama, governors, Hillary Clinton, Democrats in Congress, etc. Even he knows this is not a good situation and is hurting his re-election chances, about the only thing he really does care deeply about.

[keith]

6 minutes ago, ColoradoEagle said:

Well, it is an honest question when we can compare the reaction and planning of the US government to several other first world nations that saw nowhere near the case and death count per million that we're seeing.

Let's see how we stack up against other first world nations on a per million basis...According to Sweden using their data and data available from Johns Hopkins.