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

'The first New York patient was in...January?'

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    It can, sure.



    Keerect.



    I think you missed the point -- let's say that diabetes caused a heart attack in a patient who also had Covid-19. Would you think it was proper to list the death as "due to Covid-19"?
    They are called risk factors. Patients with risk factors may live another 20 years with that condition if not for the virus. So the virus would be the direct cause. Some otherwise healthy people die from the virus, while others don't, but we don't assign the direct cause of their deaths to underlying conditions, because it isn't the underlying conditions that killed them.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
      The fatality rate for young working adults with no preexisting conditions is very low. Unfortunately Fauci and others will have to defend the use of the quarantine. What are they going to say, 'sorry, looks like crashing the economy and causing depression level unemployment wasn't necessary?'
      The new narrative, of course, is, "Look! The quarantine is working!"
      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
      Than a fool in the eyes of God


      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by JimL View Post
        They are called risk factors.
        Thank you, Jim, EVER SO MUCH for 'splainin' that. I bet none of us could have figured that out on our own.

        Patients with risk factors may live another 20 years with that condition if not for the virus. So the virus would be the direct cause.
        When did you get your Medical Examiner license, Jim?

        Some otherwise healthy people die from the virus, while others don't, but we don't assign the direct cause of their deaths to underlying conditions.
        No, Jim, if somebody dies from a heart attack, the heart attack is the main cause of death with ASSOCIATED factors. My daughter is a Hospice Nurse Instructor, and she's WAY prettier than you!
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          The new narrative, of course, is, "Look! The quarantine is working!"
          There ought to be the mother of all lawsuits from businesses and individuals.
          Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
            To elaborate, hospitals being overloaded does not mean that a virus is more deadly. Two virus with the same fatality rate but different R0 will have a different loads on hospitals. One curve can peak in one month and overload hospitals, while another can peak in 4 months with the same fatality rate.



            Working doctors to exhaustion is primarily a matter of how fast the virus spreads and not how deadly it is. Get that into your head somehow.
            Sorry demi. The attempts to play this as somehow overblown are being fostered by ideologues not scientists. You need to think better, more clearly.

            The peak number of patients per day depends on both fatality rate and R0. Not just one or the other. Measured R0 is about twice that of the flu. So that can account for a doubling of the peak. But it can't account for the ratio of the number that get sick to the number that die. And we can look at S.Korea and Germany for good ratios. 1.5 to 2%. Testing in iceland shows asymptomatic cases are 50% - or 2 times symptomatic. S. Korea and Germany are testing nearly 100% of symptomatic cases. That leaves with with .7 to 1% mortality. And that can account for what we are seeing in terms of the number of people dying. To get this volume of patients dying from flu-like mortality the R0 would need to be very much higher. Keep in mind R0 is a measurement.

            To get where your speculation takes you, asymptomatic cases need to be well above 90%. That is not what is being found where full or nearly full testing is being done.
            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


            • #36
              Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
              Working doctors to exhaustion is primarily a matter of how fast the virus spreads and not how deadly it is. Get that into your head somehow.
              That's happening at some hospitals, but I've heard of other cases where nurses are having their hours cut because there aren't enough patients to keep them busy. One curious side effect of the fear mongering is that people who would normally go to the hospital are staying home instead, which has actually decreased patient intake.

              Doctors in many parts of the United States have reported 40-60 percent drops in admissions for heart attacks and strokes, one cardiologist wrote in the New York Times. Although many doctors and nurses are busy with a spike in COVID-19 cases, Dr. Harlan M. Krumholz also wrote, many hospitals are more empty than normal.

              "Our hospital is usually so full that patients wait in gurneys along the walls of the emergency department for a bed to become available on the general wards or even in the intensive care unit," said Dr. Krumholz. "We send people home from the hospital as soon as possible so we can free up beds for those who are waiting. But the pandemic has caused a previously unimaginable shift in the demand for hospital services."

              https://townhall.com/tipsheet/ellieb...ctors-n2566557

              I read one anecdote from an ambulance driver (I forget where he was from) saying that this is the slowest his job has ever been in his entire career.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                S. Korea and Germany are testing nearly 100% of symptomatic cases. That leaves with with .7 to 1% mortality. And that can account for what we are seeing in terms of the number of people dying. To get this volume of patients dying from flu-like mortality the R0 would need to be very much higher. Keep in mind R0 is a measurement.
                They are not doing random sampling or testing everybody.

                If you actually used your brain instead of parroting, many cases would have recovered especially since spread started weeks earlier than thought. Which is why you need extensive serology if you want any hope of knowing the true incidence rate, as Teallaura has pointed out. Real incidence rate is unknown, and real R0 is unknown.
                Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                  The system in Italy was set up to handle normal seasonal winter mortality, which of course includes flu. It fails because they got normal daily mortality + flu + the additional virus. This tells you nothing about how deadly the additional virus is, only that it spreads fast and gives a lot of cases in a short period of time.
                  Italy has over 18000 dead. They still have over 90,000 sick patients our of 140,000+ cases. and they have 3600 people currently in serious to critical condition. The measured asymptomatic case rate would make that out of 300,000 cases. Which is a real mortality rate in Italy of somewhere north of 6%.

                  And those numbers tell us a lot about how deadly the virus is.
                  Last edited by oxmixmudd; 04-09-2020, 05:32 PM.
                  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


                  • #39
                    The peak number of patients per day depends on both fatality rate and R0.
                    No, peak number of patients per day is purely about rate of spread. If you can't get that in your head, get out of the thread. There's been enough of your idiotic parroting.
                    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                      Italy has over 18000 dead. They still have over 90,000 sick patients. and they have 3600 people currently in serious to critical condition. Those numbers tell us a lot about how deadly the virus is.
                      Deadly is a matter of proportion. How many total patients are there? Complete unknown.
                      Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                        Doctors in many parts of the United States have reported 40-60 percent drops in admissions for heart attacks and strokes, one cardiologist wrote in the New York Times
                        When patients who might have heart attack, stroke or other serious stuff are avoiding the hospitals, that's a sign of too much fear mongering.
                        Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                          No, peak number of patients per day is purely about rate of spread. If you can't get that in your head, get out of the thread. There's been enough of your idiotic parroting.
                          I don't need to 'parrot' demi. I go to the data, I do the calculations.

                          R0 is the number of patients infected by a single patient. that and the available population defines what the peak number of cases will be. But Hospitals are not overrun by the peak number of cases, they are overrun by the peak number of seriously ill and dying patients. And that is defined by both the mortality and R[0]. For example, 95% mortality will overwhelm a hospital with an R0 far less that that of the flu. But .00001% mortality may not overwhelm a hospital even with a measles like r0 of 8 to 15.
                          Last edited by oxmixmudd; 04-09-2020, 05:44 PM.
                          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


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                            No demi. R0 is the number of patients infected by a single patient. that and the available population defines what the peak number of cases will be. But Hospitals are not overrun by the peak number of cases, they are overrun by the peak number of seriously ill and dying patients. And that is defined by both the mortality and R[0]. For example, 95% mortality will overwhelm a hospital with an R0 far less that that of the flu. But .00001% mortality may not overwhelm a hospital even with a measles like r0 of 8 to 15.
                            Now you're shifting goalposts from "peak number of patients a day" to "peak number of serious patients a day".

                            Let's deal with the new goalposts. Since it's due to mortality and R0, it doesn't tell you anything about mortality alone if you don't know what R0 is. And we have no clue what R0 is because the total number of cases is unknown.
                            Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                              Now you're shifting goalposts from "peak number of patients a day" to "peak number of serious patients a day".

                              Let's deal with the new goalposts. Since it's due to mortality and R0, it doesn't tell you anything about mortality alone if you don't know what R0 is. And we have no clue what R0 is because the total number of cases is unknown.
                              No I'm not. "patients" are people IN THE HOSPITAL. You've been misusing the term patient to mean cases it appears. but I have ALWAYS been talking about patients - people in the hospital needing medical intervention. The number of Patients is the number of people sick enough to be in the hospital demi. And that peak number is defined by BOTH R0 AND mortality.

                              And further, we know exactly what those numbers are. They are available all over the web. what we don't know fully is the number of cases - and you've been talking about what we don't know - # of cases, but calling that # of patients, which is wrong.

                              As for measuring R0, we do not need to know the total number of actual cases to derive that value. We can use contact tracing relative to known case coupled with full testing of those contacts over the incubation period to determine R0.
                              Last edited by oxmixmudd; 04-09-2020, 05:54 PM.
                              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


                              • #45
                                The data has more holes than swiss cheese, you idiot, primarily because we don't know how many cases there are. 'Measured R0' is useless because we don't know the actual number of cases, therefore we don't know what is the actual R0. Likewise, 'measured mortality' is useless.

                                And further, we know exactly what those numbers are. They are available all over the web.
                                Dumb parrot, one recent study revised R0 from 2.2 upwards to above 5. You do not know exactly what they are, not even close.
                                Last edited by demi-conservative; 04-09-2020, 05:58 PM.
                                Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                160 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                379 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X