Covid Spread Can’t Only Be Explained by Who’s Being ‘Bad’

[Jay59]

I guess that you didn't notice the "Silly" in the title of that table. I much prefer -- which deal with the medically significant cases.

Indeed, on the exposed bit. Now the extent of that "degree of resistance" and whether it is permanent or temporary are two other questions entirely.

In the relevant time, there is only permanent.

This virus is forcing some significant rethinking in how disease vectors work. It's clearly very contagious, but often the contagion is benign. Why?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

If the 3.12% you are talking about is the number of deaths divided by the number of cases, that is a useless number because it is totally dependent on the number of tests conducted. For example, if you only test people who die then the mortality rate measured that way would be 100%. Since the percentage of the population we were testing has varied widely that number is a hodgepodge, don’t pay any attention to it.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There is something to what you say. When you adjust the mortality rates by the ratio of testing you get

​

What that means I have no idea.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

You got a lot of numbers there, but what's your point?

My "point" is that I am reporting (in a uniform and consistent manner) the best data available to me so that others can draw their own conclusion as to what the data actually means

What is your hypothesis that you think explains the numbers you cite? What are the causal factors?

Well, for the first point, there is actually a disease known as COVID-19 that is sickening and killing people. For the second point, there are differences between the way that that disease is being dealt with in different countries.

And, perhaps more on the topic of the thread: Would it also explain numbers you don't cite?

Yes it does.

Or does it require elaborate cherry-picking amongst the data?

No it does not.

Today's updated numbers are

​

Now if you don't think that the "G-8+China"/Europe/World area set is a fair comparison to the United States of America, I'd be more than pleased to have you let me know to which countries' NATIONAL data it is fair to compare to the NATIONAL data for the United States of America.

 

[iguanaman]

When we were social distancing because go out and you die the cases were contained. When we decided that we could end social distancing just as long as you wear a mask cases exploded. Social distancing works. Masks do not.

Masks do not work in Bars, clubs and restaurants, they must remain closed for the duration. Masks are a method to reopen businesses and workplaces more safely. They are not a cure all and cannot replace contact tracing and quarantine of infected individuals. Surely you understand that NOT wearing a mask is not the answer.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The benchmark for what and by whom? Anyone using the CFR is fooling themselves or trying to fool someone else. RCP is not even calculating it properly. RCP’s calculations assume that everyone still infected (i.e. not recovered or deceased) will survive which of course will not happen.

Most sources I follow are using deaths per million people as a benchmark. That is a number that is comparable among different states or counties. CFR is not a number that can be used for comparison.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's why I include the "Mortality Rate (Closed)" column in my tables

​

 

[diz]

Now if you don't think that the "G-8+China"/Europe/World area set is a fair comparison to the United States of America, I'd be more than pleased to have you let me know to which countries' NATIONAL data it is fair to compare to the NATIONAL data for the United States of America.

I have this weird thing where I think the data to be used for a "fair comparison" depends on the point one is trying to make.

If you can't or won't state your hypothesis I can't consider whether the data supports it, or consider what other disconfirming data we might want to also consider.

 

[Moderate Right]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

It's nice that someone in the media picked up on something I've been saying here and elsewhere all along.

We are also facing a pandemic of cherrypicking Covid data to fit whatever their preferred political narrative is.

If Hollywood celebrities have been convinced it's all about masks and restaurant closings then surely it must be.

The media performance on this issue has been irresponsible. Little different than the Hollywood celebrities. Since one does not even see disconfirming evidence raised, one wonders if they even know it exists.

Instead its more stories about people who won't wear masks getting into fights in stores.

And let me state I am not "anti mask". I wear one because I figure it can't hurt. Masks are just one of the issues.

The real issue is there is a lot that we don't know. A real discussion should reflect that. A scientific discussion should certainly entertain disconfirming data.

It's a good rule of thumb that if your theory can't explain some data your theory is wrong.

Exactly. The media flat out lie. They have their anti-Trump narrative that they have to spew. Stats show that rate of new infections is mostly from the younger 20-29 age group who are going to bars and beaches. This is far more liberals and progressives than Trump supporters. But, you can count on the MSM ignoring the numbers and reporting with a video of some fat old white guy wearing a Trump T-shirt and red MAGA hat saying, "I ain't wearin no effing mask. I have posted before how when a study came out on July 3rd saying that there were positive benefits to hydroxochloroquine, the MSM totally ignored reporting the study, instead reporting that some mother in Florida treated her child with the drug and the teenager died. They even said that this girl contracted the virus from a church Covid party, which was proven to be a lie. She probably contracted the virus from a church gathering but it was not a church sponsored Covid party. The left are totally dishonest.

 

[Moderate Right]

Whether you get the coronavirus is not just a function of your own actions? It also depends on other people's actions? No ****! :roll:

But thank you for accidentally making the point that we need a nationwide mask mandate.

If you are wearing your mask it doesn't matter what anyone else is doing. There isn't one proven case of someone wearing their mask that contracted the virus from someone not wearing a mask, including Sharon Stone's lies.

 

[Moderate Right]

The article is poorly researched. Yes, we don’t know everything about the virus but we do know how to control it. Masks and social distancing are talked about the most because they are something everyone can do.

Controlling the virus basically requires slowing down the virus transmission rate to the point where on average each infected person infects less than one additional person. If you do that it is mathematically certain that the number of cases will go down.

There are many ways to slow the transmission like:

Masks
Social distancing
Lockdowns
Testing, quarantine and contact tracing
Business closings
Avoiding activities with large crowds

Different countries and states have employed different mixtures of the above, but they all help.

The article asks why Sweden’s caseload has plummeted, but the fact that they are asking tells us that they believe the popular myth that things are normal in Sweden. That is not true. Why the cases went down is not a mystery

Sweden does not mandate masks but the employ social distancing and they have now figured out that testing, quarantine and contact tracing REDUCES cases not increases cases. Unfortunately for the US, Trump has never grasped this.

“Sweden is tackling the COVID-19 pandemic through both legally binding measures and recommendations. The government and the Swedish Public Health Agency have taken a number of decisions involving a wide range of new regulations and recommendations that affect the whole of society, including people’s private lives. There is no full lockdown in force, but many parts of Swedish society have shut down.

Life is not carrying on as normal in Sweden. Many people are staying at home and many have stopped travelling. This has had severe effects on Swedes as well as on the Swedish economy. Many businesses are folding. Unemployment is expected to rise dramatically. The Government has taken several measures to mitigate the economic effects and to stabilise the economy.

Sweden shares the same aim as all other countries: to protect the life and health of its population. Fundamentally, Sweden’s measures only differ from other countries in two regards: we are not shutting down schools for younger children or childcare facilities and we have no regulation that forces citizens to remain in their homes.”

Sweden’s response to COVID-19: “Life is not carrying on as normal”

“Sweden was slow to ramp up testing for any but the seriously ill and healthcare workers, but weekly numbers for tests have more than doubled since late may, putting the country in the same bracket as extensively testing nations such as Germany”

Every time you find an infected person and they quarantine, you are reducing the average transmission rate.

Access Denied


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

They've been doing that in California for at least a month. No progress.

 

[Moderate Right]

Sure, and there are quite a few unknowns. The problem is how to deal with the impacts that affect citizens, and for that we tend to go with what we do know thus far. What's still up for debate is what would happen in a place like New York if things opened up fully with no restrictions; that kind of scenario would put Gabriela Gomes' scenario to the test. I certainly hope that's the case, but we have to be prepared if it isn't. So far some states have opened more cautiously than others, so the question in my mind is whether those policies and people's behavior were a driving force in the surge.

I've cited Britton's study in another thread because he was stating a lower percentage of the population would need to be exposed to reach some level of herd immunity, but when you start doing the math on a population the size of ours, it gets a bit scary.

It's pretty much been proven. We have two choices:

1. Learn to live it the best we can and have an economy with jobs, unfortunately having to accept that .5% of the population will die working on both treatments and vaccines.


2. Lock down, and continue staying locked down, throwing the entire planet into a Great Depression that makes the 1930's look like a boom. Every place in the world that locked down and reopened is having surges. The only way to stop it is to lock down and stay locked down, even more than New Zealand did because even they are having a "surge". You have to stay locked down until there is nothing left to reopen.

 

[ElChupacabra]

It's pretty much been proven. We have two choices:

There are more options than that.

1. Learn to live it the best we can and have an economy with jobs, unfortunately having to accept that .5% of the population will die working on both treatments and vaccines.

The problem with that is you'll end up with a portion of the population seeking other options. If you end up with surges, they'll impact available workers etc. so it's not as if this is a meat grinder into which you can just keep shoving people and they'll be none the wiser.

2. Lock down, and continue staying locked down, throwing the entire planet into a Great Depression that makes the 1930's look like a boom. Every place in the world that locked down and reopened is having surges. The only way to stop it is to lock down and stay locked down, even more than New Zealand did because even they are having a "surge". You have to stay locked down until there is nothing left to reopen.

See above. Do you think things will remain the same if you continue to see large surges? So far in the northeast there's been a scaled reopening and the numbers are staying low; hopefully this continues as the next phases are implemented.

 

[Phys251]

If you are wearing your mask it doesn't matter what anyone else is doing.

MR logic: "If I'm not driving drunk, it doesn't matter if anyone else on the road is driving drunk."

:failpail:

 

[danielpalos]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

It's nice that someone in the media picked up on something I've been saying here and elsewhere all along.

We are also facing a pandemic of cherrypicking Covid data to fit whatever their preferred political narrative is.

If Hollywood celebrities have been convinced it's all about masks and restaurant closings then surely it must be.

The media performance on this issue has been irresponsible. Little different than the Hollywood celebrities. Since one does not even see disconfirming evidence raised, one wonders if they even know it exists.

Instead its more stories about people who won't wear masks getting into fights in stores.

And let me state I am not "anti mask". I wear one because I figure it can't hurt. Masks are just one of the issues.

The real issue is there is a lot that we don't know. A real discussion should reflect that. A scientific discussion should certainly entertain disconfirming data.

It's a good rule of thumb that if your theory can't explain some data your theory is wrong.

Anecdotal evidence claims "being Bad"' about mitigation can help the spread.

The South Dakota Department of Health issued a warning on Tuesday that one person who spent several hours at a bar on Main Street in Sturgis has tested positive for COVID-19 and may have spread it to others.--https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/08/18/south-dakota-tallies-460000-vehicles-during-sturgis-rally

 

[snakestretcher]

fine the militant maskless a couple hundred a pop when they go out in public without a mask. fine the places that let them in a couple hundred a pop. if either refuses to pay, up it to thousands.

problem solved.

Exactly; hit the idiots where it hurts-in their pockets. A stern talking-to clearly has no effect on these conservative 'freedom!' idiots.

 

[snakestretcher]

It's pretty much been proven. We have two choices:

1. Learn to live it the best we can and have an economy with jobs, unfortunately having to accept that .5% of the population will die working on both treatments and vaccines.


2. Lock down, and continue staying locked down, throwing the entire planet into a Great Depression that makes the 1930's look like a boom. Every place in the world that locked down and reopened is having surges. The only way to stop it is to lock down and stay locked down, even more than New Zealand did because even they are having a "surge". You have to stay locked down until there is nothing left to reopen.

An entire 9 cases in New Zealand is only a "surge" if you remember that up to that point there were NO reported cases for a very long time. Meanwhile mighty America is reporting tens of thousands a day...but Trump says it's under control so that's ok. You can rest easy.

New Zealand PM's PERFECT Response To Trump Attacks - YouTube

 

[Moderate Right]

An entire 9 cases in New Zealand is only a "surge" if you remember that up to that point there were NO reported cases for a very long time. Meanwhile mighty America is reporting tens of thousands a day...but Trump says it's under control so that's ok. You can rest easy.

New Zealand PM's PERFECT Response To Trump Attacks - YouTube

Biden came out with his Covid plan on commercial. Biden's Covid Plan

 

[Helix]

Exactly; hit the idiots where it hurts-in their pockets. A stern talking-to clearly has no effect on these conservative 'freedom!' idiots.

their freedom ends at their noses.

 

[Phys251]

Anecdotal evidence claims "being Bad"' about mitigation can help the spread.

It begins.

 

[danielpalos]

It begins.

The South Dakota Department of Health issued a warning on Tuesday that one person who spent several hours at a bar on Main Street in Sturgis has tested positive for COVID-19 and may have spread it to others.

We should blame that Governor.

Why is the right wing against a governor who is actually trying to do something about the pandemic?

Job 34:30 applies, right wingers. Why should we take you All seriously about morals in Abortion threads when some of you may still believe the pandemic is a Hoax?

 

[diz]

Anecdotal evidence claims "being Bad"' about mitigation can help the spread.

Well, uh, thanks for helping illustrate my point. Your need to cherrypick stories that confirm your biases indeed seems strong.

Do you think the CDC data showing that Blacks and Hispanics are 4 or 5 times more likely to get COVID as whites might suggest that all these posts about white conservatives not wearing masks are the problem somewhat questionable?

 

[danielpalos]

Well, uh, thanks for helping illustrate my point. Your need to cherrypick stories that confirm your biases indeed seems strong.

Do you think the CDC data showing that Blacks and Hispanics are 4 or 5 times more likely to get COVID as whites might suggest that all these posts about white conservatives not wearing masks are the problem somewhat questionable?

I am not sure how you reached your conclusion. One line of reasoning my suggest the need for a healthier diet. Also, blacks and hispanics may live in more extended families. Native Americans have a similar issue.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I have this weird thing where I think the data to be used for a "fair comparison" depends on the point one is trying to make.

The technical term for that is "cherry picking".

If you can't or won't state your hypothesis I can't consider whether the data supports it, or consider what other disconfirming data we might want to also consider.

There is no "hypothesis" that goes beyond

"Here is the best data that I have on the G-8 countries, China, Europe (as an aggregate), and the world (as an aggregate and here is how that data interrelates.".
​

The FACTS are that

1. in 7 of the other 9 listed areas, a person picked at random has (without consideration of any other factor) a LOWER chance of dying from COVID-19 than does a person picked at random in the US;
   *
2. in 9 out of the other 9 listed areas a person picked at random has (after adjusting for relative PPP GDP per capita) a LOWER chance of dying from COVID-19 than does a person picked at random in the US;
   *
   and
   *
3. in 9 out of the other 9 listed areas a person picked at random has (after adjusting for relative healthcare spending per capita) a LOWER chance of dying from COVID-19 than does a person picked at random in the US.

What do those facts MEAN? I think that they mean that the US isn't punching up to its weight in its own fight against COVID-19 and I think that they also mean that the US isn't getting the "bangs for the buck" out of its healthcare system that it ought to be getting.

You tell me what you think they mean.

 

[NWRatCon]

Well, uh, thanks for helping illustrate my point. Your need to cherrypick stories that confirm your biases indeed seems strong.

Do you think the CDC data showing that Blacks and Hispanics are 4 or 5 times more likely to get COVID as whites might suggest that all these posts about white conservatives not wearing masks are the problem somewhat questionable?

Are you at all concerned that apples are not, in fact, oranges? And how can anyone logically call a tomato a fruit?

With respect, that criticism is nonsensical. (In fact, it's technically a non-sequitur.) I get the feeling you're resorting to spaghetti logic to support your initial premise. Many things are not known about COVID, yet, but some things are. Data - reliable data - demonstrates that COVID is highly transmissible. Because, unfortunately, we have so many cases, we have a lot of data. You have, on several occasions, accused others of "cherry picking" data to reach conclusions, and yet MANY of your assertions are based entirely on that fallacy.

Let's get back to the real world, shall we? In the real world thousands of people are dying of COVID complications. Millions of people have contracted the virus. Real world experience and mountains of data demonstrate (and simple logic confirms) that routine mask wearing and social distancing reduces the spread of airborne viruses.

In the real world, data is just data. Analysis can suggest correlations. Correlations can be tested through experiments and analysis, and either confirmed or refuted. The process is imperfect. But, for example, data suggests that routine wearing of seatbelts reduces traffic fatalities by 50%. Wearing a mask and social distancing reduces the spread of the virus SARS-CoV-2 by at least that much. In neither case does every one who wears one avoid exposure nor will everyone who does not be infected. Science is rarely perfect, but it is rational.

"Wash your hands, wear a mask, keep your distance and don't be stupid."

 

[George50]

They've been doing that in California for at least a month. No progress.

California needs to try harder.

DAILY NEW CASES

19.7
PER
100K
Very large number of new cases

“A significant percentage (6.8%) of COVID tests were positive, meaning that California’s testing meets WHO minimums but needs to be further expanded to detect most new cases. Identifying and isolating new cases can help contain COVID without resorting to lockdowns.”

Countries and states who are successful have positive test rates less than 3%, California’s rate is 6.8. That’s too high.

“With 7,774 new daily cases on average, California needs an estimated 38,870 contact tracers on staff to trace each new case to a known case within 48 hours of detection. Per our best available data, California has 10,600 contact tracers, fulfilling 27% of this staffing requirement. With insufficient contact tracing staff, California is unlikely to be able to successfully identify and isolate sources of disease spread fast enough to prevent new outbreaks.”

Covid Act Now

Compare this to New York.

DAILY NEW CASES

3.4
PER
100K
COVID not contained, but at low levels

“A low percentage (0.8%) of COVID tests were positive, which suggests enough widespread, aggressive testing in New York to detect most new cases. Identifying and isolating new cases can help contain COVID without resorting to lockdowns.”

“With 655 new daily cases on average, New York needs an estimated 3,275 contact tracers on staff to trace each new case to a known case within 48 hours of detection. Per our best available data, New York has 9,620 contact tracers, fulfilling 100% of this staffing requirement. Sufficient staff alone does not guarantee successful contact tracing. New York will need to ensure the contact tracing program is run effectively and that testing with short test result turnaround time is widely available.”

Covid Act Now

As you can see, California is not doing the job that New York is. If they can’t ramp up their testing/contact tracing, people are going to have to get better at wearing masks/social distancing or some parts of the economy are going to have to be shut down again.

The virus can be controlled, but you have to stay on top of it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[George50]

It's pretty much been proven. We have two choices:

1. Learn to live it the best we can and have an economy with jobs, unfortunately having to accept that .5% of the population will die working on both treatments and vaccines.


2. Lock down, and continue staying locked down, throwing the entire planet into a Great Depression that makes the 1930's look like a boom. Every place in the world that locked down and reopened is having surges. The only way to stop it is to lock down and stay locked down, even more than New Zealand did because even they are having a "surge". You have to stay locked down until there is nothing left to reopen.

A surge? You are listening to Trump. New Zealand had 12 new cases yesterday and 9 the day before. We had 40,000+.

You are missing the third and obvious choice. Controlling the virus (which can be done) leads to a better economy and far fewer deaths. Germany and South Korea are 2 examples who did a good job.

US: 2qtr GDP = -32.9%, unemployment rate = 10.2%, deaths per million to date = 526

Germany: 2qtr GDP = -10.1%, unemployment rate = 4.2%, deaths per million to date = 111

South Korea: 2qtr GDP = -3.3%, unemployment rate = 4.3%, deaths per million = 6


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk