Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Coronavirus Outbreak...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    Your CDC page was talking about what a mortality rate was as a general definition and in regards to a population, not in regards to deaths due to a specific disease.
    Umm...no. The CDC age was providing definitions for the various ways mortality is measured and the terms associated with each way. I'm pretty sure it goes so far as to list the numerator and denominator associated with each term.

    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    This is simple math. If you want to know what the overall mortality rate of a population of a cause, you would use the deaths from cause / population you are measuring. If you are wanting to know what the mortality rate of say all male adults in the USA of COVID you would divide the number of adult male COVID deaths/male adult population of USA. If you just want to know the mortality rate of COVID-19 of those who catch it, then you would use Number of COVID Deaths/Number of COVID Infections. And the latter is clearly what I was talking about. Which means that the more testing we have done, the more cases we will find that did not require hospitalization and that will lover the mortality rate for COVID-19. If 50% of all people who catch COVID die, then that is worse than if you know that only 1% of those who catch it will die. More testing will reveal more cases where people did not require a hospital.
    Sparko - you are again beating a dead horse. I understand that if you want to know the likelihood of someone dying if they contracts a particular virus, you need the total number of deaths due to that virus (numerator) and the total number infected by that virus (denominator). You call that number the "mortality rate." The CDC, and most (all?) epidemiology text books, call it the "case-specific mortality rate." The "mortality rate," also known as the "crude mortality rate" is actually the number of deaths due to a specific virus (or any disease) divided by the total population. That's just how the language is used by epidemiologists. I totally understand that the press (mistakenly) uses "mortality rate" as you describe it.

    I've also said, several times now, that you can use the language anyway you want, and I'll try to remember what you mean when you use it in any discussion we may have. I prefer to use the formal language defined by the CDC and experts in epidemiology.

    And I also recognize that more testing will get our number closer and closer to the actual case-specific mortality rate. The current numbers are around 4% and most experts expect it to drop to the 1% that has been re-affirmed in several countries that have done a better testing job than we have (e.g., South Korea, Germany, etc.). More testing does NOT account for the increasing incidence of hospitalizations and the climbing death rate. Nor does more testing account for the higher percentage of positives within the tested population. The only things that account for those changes is that more people are actually being infected (i.e., the presence SARS Cor-2 is increasing in the population).
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      Your CDC page was talking about what a mortality rate was as a general definition and in regards to a population, not in regards to deaths due to a specific disease.

      This is simple math. If you want to know what the overall mortality rate of a population of a cause, you would use the deaths from cause / population you are measuring. If you are wanting to know what the mortality rate of say all male adults in the USA of COVID you would divide the number of adult male COVID deaths/male adult population of USA. If you just want to know the mortality rate of COVID-19 of those who catch it, then you would use Number of COVID Deaths/Number of COVID Infections. And the latter is clearly what I was talking about. Which means that the more testing we have done, the more cases we will find that did not require hospitalization and that will lover the mortality rate for COVID-19. If 50% of all people who catch COVID die, then that is worse than if you know that only 1% of those who catch it will die. More testing will reveal more cases where people did not require a hospital.
      Sparko - why do you think there is an argument here between you and Carpe? You both have expressed a valid understanding of mortality.
      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

      Comment


      • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
        Sparko - why do you think there is an argument here between you and Carpe? You both have expressed a valid understanding of mortality.
        because he felt it necessary to mock my initial quoting of the mortality rate by saying

        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
        Wow. Your grasp of statistics is really, really, bad, Sparko. You keep demonstrating this. More testing has little/no impact on the mortality rate.
        And now he is basically saying, "you were right" without actually admitting he was "wrong"

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          because he felt it necessary to mock my initial quoting of the mortality rate by saying

          And now he is basically saying, "you were right" without actually admitting he was "wrong"
          Actually, Sparko, I wasn't wrong. 1) I used the language correctly. 2) Testing does not change the case-specific mortality rate (though it may change our instantaneous perception of it)*. 3) And your grasp of statistics is historically pretty bad. Don't you remember telling me about all of the "wrong" polls from 2016 and then linking me to a history of RCP's polls, none of which could be shown to be "wrong." You don't seem to have a very good grasp of statistics in general.

          You're not alone. Even the press gets it wrong pretty regularly. I happen to have a pretty strong mathematics background, so I'm a little more comfortable with it than the average, though I am by no means a mathematician and have been caught in an error now and again.

          *Just to clarify this statement: the virus has a case-specific mortality rate. That rate can be different for different demographics, and it can change if the virus mutates or as a result of the application of differing treatment regimens. But testing doesn't change it. All testing does is help us to find out what the case-specific mortality rate actually is. In the early stages of a pandemic, the numbers are preliminary and rough. The more widely we test, the more accurate our estimation of the case-specific mortality rate becomes.

          ETA: You know, it is somewhat ironic that you are complaining about someone mocking you, when mocking is pretty much your default position with someone who disagrees with you. Be that as it may, you are correct that my comment about your statistical skills was unnecessarily unkind and mocking. I apologize.
          Last edited by carpedm9587; 07-14-2020, 09:15 AM.
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
            because he felt it necessary to mock my initial quoting of the mortality rate by saying



            And now he is basically saying, "you were right" without actually admitting he was "wrong"
            I would interpret that as semantics. Though I understand the offense that would go along with being mocked. IOW, there is the mortality we can measure, which is known covid deaths/known covid cases, and then there is the actual mortality, which is (known covid deaths + undetected covid deaths) / (known covid cases+ undetected covid cases)*.

            Testing can affect the former, but not the latter. The more testing that is done however, the smaller the difference will be between the two.

            The problem is that there is a message being pushed out that actual corona virus cases are a consequence of testing, which is absurd.

            *I recognize my two formula are somewhat simplified
            Last edited by oxmixmudd; 07-14-2020, 09:13 AM.
            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

            Comment


            • Note" Trump says the question of students returning to school is a political question by Democrats and liberals who wish to wait for determining whether to send all students back to school full time for health reasons.

              Apparently Trump is coldly indifferent to the hazards to the health of the teachers that are older and vulnerable to COVID-19. Also the risk of the students is indeed lower, but still present.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                Note" Trump says the question of students returning to school is a political question by Democrats and liberals who wish to wait for determining whether to send all students back to school full time for health reasons.

                Apparently Trump is coldly indifferent to the hazards to the health of the teachers that are older and vulnerable to COVID-19. Also the risk of the students is indeed lower, but still present.
                Well he's right, the question of sending the students back to school is political, but it's political because opening up the schools is a strickly political decision on the part of the President, not democrats. Trump's not concerned about the kids, or the teachers, or about the further spread of the virus, he's more interested in opening up the economy regardless of the consequences because the economy is what he wants to run on.

                Everyone should be aware of the fact by now that Trump waved the white flag in surrender to the virus long ago.

                The VP told an audience today that the Administration doesn't want those in charge of opening the schools to pay any attention to the CDC's guidance, and the Administration also wants all statistical data concerning the virus to go directly to HHS where his cronies can fudge the numbers (coverup) rather than to their usual destination which was the CDC so that the actual scientist can determine what needs be done. Trump is totally disregarding the science, which of course he's been doing for quite some time now and unless states ignore Trumps personal guidance it's only going to continue to get worse.

                About the only hope this country has of recovering from this virus now is if in November we get rid of the virus that found it's way into the White House in 2016. Unfortunately it has beed estimated that another 100,000 deaths, bringing the total to 240,000 deaths, will have occured by that time. Apparently 240,000 deaths and a ruined economy isn't even enough to get Trumpsters to to recognize, or admit to the fact, that they've made a terrible mistake.
                Last edited by JimL; 07-14-2020, 11:21 PM.

                Comment


                • https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/fo...vid-19-results

                  ORLANDO, Fla. - After FOX 35 News noticed errors in the state's report on positivity rates, the Florida Department of Health said that some laboratories have not been reporting negative test result data to the state.

                  Countless labs have reported a 100 percent positivity rate, which means every single person tested was positive. Other labs had very high positivity rates. FOX 35 News found that testing sites like one local Centra Care reported that 83 people were tested and all tested positive. Then, NCF Diagnostics in Alachua reported 88 percent of tests were positive.

                  The report showed that Orlando Health had a 98 percent positivity rate. However, when FOX 35 News contacted the hospital, they confirmed errors in the report. Orlando Health's positivity rate is only 9.4 percent, not 98 percent as in the report.

                  The report also showed that the Orlando Veteran’s Medical Center had a positivity rate of 76 percent. A spokesperson for the VA told FOX 35 News on Tuesday that this does not reflect their numbers and that the positivity rate for the center is actually 6 percent.

                  FOX 35 News went on to speak with the Florida Department of Health on Tuesday. They confirmed that although private and public laboratories are required to report positive and negative results to the state immediately, some have not. Specifically, they said that some smaller, private labs were not reporting negative test result data to the state.
                  That's what
                  - She

                  Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                  - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                  I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                  - Stephen R. Donaldson

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/fo...vid-19-results

                    ORLANDO, Fla. - After FOX 35 News noticed errors in the state's report on positivity rates, the Florida Department of Health said that some laboratories have not been reporting negative test result data to the state.

                    Countless labs have reported a 100 percent positivity rate, which means every single person tested was positive. Other labs had very high positivity rates. FOX 35 News found that testing sites like one local Centra Care reported that 83 people were tested and all tested positive. Then, NCF Diagnostics in Alachua reported 88 percent of tests were positive.

                    The report showed that Orlando Health had a 98 percent positivity rate. However, when FOX 35 News contacted the hospital, they confirmed errors in the report. Orlando Health's positivity rate is only 9.4 percent, not 98 percent as in the report.

                    The report also showed that the Orlando Veteran’s Medical Center had a positivity rate of 76 percent. A spokesperson for the VA told FOX 35 News on Tuesday that this does not reflect their numbers and that the positivity rate for the center is actually 6 percent.

                    FOX 35 News went on to speak with the Florida Department of Health on Tuesday. They confirmed that although private and public laboratories are required to report positive and negative results to the state immediately, some have not. Specifically, they said that some smaller, private labs were not reporting negative test result data to the state.
                    It will be interesting to see what the final data shows. Note, however, the emphasized line, especially the bolded part. We have no idea what "some" means. And basic math tells us that the dominant part of any equation are the larger numbers. So, is this an example of a news outlet finding an anomaly and creating a story out of it, in the process exaggerating the problem?

                    For example, let's assume "some" is "25% of the reporting laboratories - specifically the smaller ones - representing 10% of the samples reported (because it's the smaller labs)." If the overall positivity rate WITH the bad numbers is reported at 20%, these labs reported 100% positivity when the actual number for these labs actually averaged 6% (the lowest of the reported numbers), the actual global positivity rate would change from 20% to 7.5%. That would be a fairly significant change and represents a much less bad outcome.

                    But what if "some" is "5% of the reporting laboratories - specifically the smaller ones - representing 1% of the samples reported (because it's the smaller labs)." If the overall positivity rate WITH the bad numbers is reported at 20%, these labs reported 100% positivity when the actual number for these labs actually averaged 6% (the lowest of the reported numbers), the actual global positivity rate would change from 20% to 17.1%. That is nowhere near as significant a change, and still represents a pretty bad outcome.

                    And if "some" is "5% of the reporting laboratories - specifically the smaller ones - representing 0.5% of the samples reported (because it's the smaller labs)." If the overall positivity rate WITH the bad numbers is reported at 20%, these labs reported 100% positivity when the actual number for these labs actually averaged 9%, the actual global positivity rate would change from 20% to 18.9%. That is a trivial shift.

                    So - bottom line - this article tells us nothing except that some labs are not reporting accurate numbers. That is no surprise; there is always noise in the data. The question that needs to be answered is "how much noise?"
                    Last edited by carpedm9587; 07-15-2020, 08:07 AM.
                    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                      https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/fo...vid-19-results

                      ORLANDO, Fla. - After FOX 35 News noticed errors in the state's report on positivity rates, the Florida Department of Health said that some laboratories have not been reporting negative test result data to the state.

                      Countless labs have reported a 100 percent positivity rate, which means every single person tested was positive. Other labs had very high positivity rates. FOX 35 News found that testing sites like one local Centra Care reported that 83 people were tested and all tested positive. Then, NCF Diagnostics in Alachua reported 88 percent of tests were positive.

                      The report showed that Orlando Health had a 98 percent positivity rate. However, when FOX 35 News contacted the hospital, they confirmed errors in the report. Orlando Health's positivity rate is only 9.4 percent, not 98 percent as in the report.

                      The report also showed that the Orlando Veteran’s Medical Center had a positivity rate of 76 percent. A spokesperson for the VA told FOX 35 News on Tuesday that this does not reflect their numbers and that the positivity rate for the center is actually 6 percent.

                      FOX 35 News went on to speak with the Florida Department of Health on Tuesday. They confirmed that although private and public laboratories are required to report positive and negative results to the state immediately, some have not. Specifically, they said that some smaller, private labs were not reporting negative test result data to the state.
                      So - this means positivity rates might be exaggerated (see carpe's post above). It does not mean florida's more than 12,000 new cases yesterday are false, nor does it mean its 35 deaths yesterday are false, nor does it mean the exponential uptick in the spread of the disease is false, nor does it mean the fact Miami hospitals are at or near capacity in terms of available ICU beds is false.

                      Of far more importance is the attempt to divert the raw data from the CDC into a private database controlled by a non-medical, non-scientific organization beholden to Trump's political goals.

                      https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...t-cdc-n1233861

                      Taking the data away from the public, away from the researchers and scientists that need access to it to properly understand what is happening with the disease, is unconscionable. It is a move that has no other consequence than to make it possible to hide what is really happening, and to silence those voices that would expose the negligence found in the current admin.

                      Source: above

                      Four former CDC directors or acting directors wrote an op-ed that appeared in The Washington Post Tuesday titled, "We ran the CDC. No president ever politicized its science the way Trump has."

                      Tom Frieden, Jeffrey Koplan, David Satcher and Richard Besser warned in the op-ed of "political leaders and others attempting to undermine the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."

                      They wrote that the Trump administration has cast public doubt on CDC recommendations and highlighted comments regarding the reopening of schools.

                      © Copyright Original Source

                      Last edited by oxmixmudd; 07-15-2020, 08:48 AM.
                      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                      Comment


                      • Nearly six months on, and it's enlightening to look back at posts made when the outbreak was just beginning.

                        But of course those who could learn the most from hindsight are also those who think they don't need to.
                        Last edited by Roy; 08-11-2020, 05:03 AM.
                        Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                        MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                        MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                        seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                        Comment


                        • captain_hindsight.jpg
                          Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                          Beige Federalist.

                          Nationalist Christian.

                          "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                          Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                          Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                          Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                          Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                          Justice for Matthew Perna!

                          Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Roy View Post
                            Nearly six months on, and it's enlightening to look back at posts made when the outbreak was just beginning.
                            This decade-long year does make me wish I'd kept a diary and recorded what I'd thought about the present and the range of likely futures at each particular time, so I could now go and look back on it and see how right/wrong I was.

                            Internet posts aren't quite a substitute for that. Overall, from things I can remember, I think my expectations (such as they were, there was a lot of "I have no idea what a pandemic will entail"), were calibrated about right. I predicted the length of my own country's lockdown. I seem to have been waaay more right in my economic predictions concerning my own country (predicting very limited impact on the economy and jobs) than the economists here have been (predicting absolute doom).

                            Probably my most-wrong thing is that it looks like I'm going to be out by a factor of 2x on a prediction of US-deaths-by-31-August that I made sometime around 31 March, though given the Trump admin's recent move to seize control of data reporting there's an argument to be had that all US data is now unreliable.
                            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                              [ATTACH=CONFIG]47576[/ATTACH]
                              and . . .
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment


                              • It took six months for the world to reach 10 million confirmed cases of COVID-19. It took just over six weeks for that number to double to 20 millions. And we haven't seen the second phase yet.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                231 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                293 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X