Be especially careful in upcoming months

[Hook]

Couple this with large increases in certain specific types of events - like massive strokes in young, healthy people - that are known to be related to a Covid19 side effect (in this case blood clotting)

Hey, great news for us with various heart problems! We're already on blood thinners to prevent stroke!

Hook

[Mikenor]

Steamdriver, lets agree to disagree. I'm tapping out of this one - have a great day y'all

[Stearmandriver]

The CDC's documentation always cites source material and describes methodology. The source material is peer reviewed literature; if you don't have access to another academic search engine, Google Scholar will work well enough if you care to read it. You may not always be able to access full studies, but you'll be able to read the abstract and summary anyway.

Transparency is a base requirement in research. The idea that someone would need to be an "insider" (inside of what?) to understand it is odd. Typically, a study with non-transparent processes would be shredded during the peer review process on methodology issues alone, right?

Likewise, the idea of "manipulating" statistics is odd here. There isn't any convoluted 30-step process going on to justify a hypothesis; we're talking one direct step of division. The math literally couldn't be simpler. What seems suspect to you about it??

Please understand, I'm not trying to be argumentative. Just curious as to where these ideas come from. It's fascinating to me that it can make sense to some people that the solid consensus of the worldwide epidemiological community, as well as all government and academic public health agencies, is somehow wrong (but the guy making YouTube videos somehow knows better?).

[twsharp12]

A local factory near where I live had some positive cases so they went ahead and tested everyone in the entire plant. 400 people tested positive out all working there. Most were asymptomatic. Out of those 400, one person died, and that person had pre-existing health issues. The math in that isolated incident would be a .25% death rate.

Edit: Source - https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/04/us/trium ... index.html

[Jarek]

Clear example of manipulation was given - reporting number of cases alone without giving number of tests made. And media are doing their fearmonger's job this way.
Please go to CDC, display raw data for mortality rates from 2015 to 2020 (As a remainder, this thread was started with information that big part of population is at life threat now). Using the same dataset, by using grouping I can create analysis that will fear you or that will give opposite signal. As an example I can show data for Arizona alone (which is clearly high) and do projection for entire country - or calculate average for country which is slightly increased, and this is just the simplest tweak I can make. Just a simple math? Good luck unless you have lot of time to dig and verify everything.

BTW. If you could find 2 out of 10 people that based on information given in the mainstream media say "ok, I will verify" and do the scan of scientific articles on a given subject, I will call it a big success.

[BrettT]

One thing I learned from a lifetime of dealing with data...... You can pretty much get numbers to say what you want them to..... and there are plenty of news outlets and even scientific outlets from all spectrums that have their views on what they would like those numbers to say

[JJB17463rdBombGroup]

I am just saying just be careful we have one forum member who is just in recovery here just recently .
I have neighbors across the street from me who do not use social distancing ,have visitors often and very rarely wear masks.
You do not want to suffer or die and be a statistic either way OK folks.That's all.

[Ron Attwood]

It may well have been better to add 'I am going to' to the front of this thread title.

[JJB17463rdBombGroup]

It may well have been better to add 'I am going to' to the front of this thread title.

I am going to the front of this thread.
Thank you Ron

[Stearmandriver]

Well, let me ask this, for folks that think there's manipulation of data or interpretation: why is there then such a solid consensus among every reputable public health or research agency? If the data were truly ambiguous, and truly supported multiple conclusions, why aren't the journals littered with articles that have survived peer review, and make the case that Covid19 really isn't all that dangerous?

All this raw data comes from the CDC. It's been shown on here that a Youtuber made a video - using CDC data - claiming that Covid19 wasn't very dangerous, that the CFR was around .25%. Now, if that's true, why don't the epidemiologists at the CDC - who surely must be as familiar with and equipped to interpret their data as anyone - agree? Why isn't there any dissent within the ranks of the CDC about the 2% - 3% CFR?

Basically there's three possibilities:

1. The CDC is engaged in active conspiracy to hide the truth from Americans and was busted by a random guy on YouTube.

2. The CDC and NIH professionals are competent enough to collect data (which random guy on YouTube uses to make his case), but not competent enough to interpret it (despite being a collection of the most experienced epidemiologists in the world), and random YouTube guy is smarter than their collective knowledge.

3. The CDC (and the consensus of basically all other infectious disease researchers in the world) is right, and random YouTube weight loss guy is incorrect.

I mean... to an objective observer, which of those options seems more likely?

And to anyone suggesting the math calculating CFR is in any way complicated... can you show me an example equation? I'm trying to understand. It's literally just a ratio calculation?!?

[Hobart Escin]

So I went to Best Buy today and utilized their curbside pickup. I parked my car in the designated space and used the app on my phone to tell them I was outside the store. I was wearing a mask and gloves to protect others as much as myself. A young employee came out with my merchandise (I would guess high school age), also masked up and wearing gloves. We exchanged pleasantries as he handed me my order and wished one another a good day. Before turning to go back into the store, he paused and said, "thank you for taking all this virus stuff seriously".

I was both humbled and impressed that such a young person in today's socio-political climate here in the USA simply 'got it'. No need for politics or debate about one's constitutional rights; rather, this young but very mature individual upheld a responsibility to protect other people's health and in turn respected my commitment to protect his health. Science, common sense, and mutual respect for one another's well-being without hate or vitrol ever figuring into the equation. Pretty cool stuff.

[AKar]

For what it's worth, the trend of deaths caused by corona virus has not been climbing together with the number of infections [source data]. Death rates established early in the pandemic are probably exaggerated. I gather that it is not thoroughly understood why the deaths peaked so distinctly during the early phase, but have remained comparatively low since.

-Esa

[twsharp12]

That kids is required by his company to comply with health policy. It may or may not have anything to do with how he feels. I wear a mask upon customer request at my business as well, which requires a lot of face to face meetings. I’m professional and courteous throughout the whole exchange. However, I do believe it’s all overdone and I do not believe quarantining healthy people is the right response to any disease outbreak.

Ironically as the case numbers have gone up in my county, people have begun realizing people aren’t actually dying from the disease, and few require a hospital visit, so we have become more lax with time. Herd immunity is here.

[Hook]

All this raw data comes from the CDC. It's been shown on here that a Youtuber made a video - using CDC data - claiming that Covid19 wasn't very dangerous, that the CFR was around .25%. Now, if that's true, why don't the epidemiologists at the CDC - who surely must be as familiar with and equipped to interpret their data as anyone - agree? Why isn't there any dissent within the ranks of the CDC about the 2% - 3% CFR?

I don't know whose numbers are right and I don't really care. The bottom line is, if the CDC says Covid-19 isn't all that dangerous, people would stop taking precautions. Everyone at the CDC knows this. And there is no conspiracy, it's just Standard Operating Procedure, and it's a Good Thing.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm going to take precautions. It doesn't matter exactly how dangerous Covid-19 is. But I'm not going to worry about it either. I don't need any extra stress in my life.

Hook

[Hobart Escin]

That kids is required by his company to comply with health policy. It may or may not have anything to do with how he feels. I wear a mask upon customer request at my business as well, which requires a lot of face to face meetings. I’m professional and courteous throughout the whole exchange. However, I do believe it’s all overdone and I do not believe quarantining healthy people is the right response to any disease outbreak.

Ironically as the case numbers have gone up in my county, people have begun realizing people aren’t actually dying from the disease, and few require a hospital visit, so we have become more lax with time. Herd immunity is here.

My point was the kid sincerely acknowledged wearing a mask was a considerate and responsible preventative measure to protect people's health, irregardless of his employer's policy. He was basically thanking ME for a wearing a mask as well. And it's just that easy. Listen to what scientists and doctors are telling us; use simple steps to prevent the spread of the disease to vulnerable parts of our population (which may include any one of us due to specific genetics and pre-existing health conditions, even the young and seemingly healthy). Wearing a mask is pretty effortless, along with making reasonable efforts at social distancing until an effective vaccine is developed. This won't last forever; deal with it for however long it takes and carry on.