DocSnowball Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 This looks pretty bad: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemlee/stanford-coronavirus-neeleman-ioannidis-whistleblower Liberty, I am not sure what sounds bad. In this times while the world is shut down, a test that takes $200K, a professor from Stanford had to take 5000$ to do the test which everyone agrees needs to be done? They didn't have any funds from the 2 trillion dollars to do the study? The plan was to keep making decisions without knowing the real extent of spread and who is getting how much? That is what sounds bad. Many studies (and I posted recently on this) confirmed Stanford result. The studies confirmed the Stanford study results, that there are lot of asymptomatic carriers and the infection fatality rate is much lower than thought before. The buzzfeed is an attack article because it fails to mention I believe a dozen more studies done since then by different teams across world, many of them are reputed hospitals or professors. Buzzfeed "forgets" to mention this and goes on attacking a scientist for doing his job which frankly, the task force should have done long back. We are really going back to Galileos times attacking the scientist rather than looking at the result and its confirmation in multiple studies and its consequences of this new information. This attitude of Buzzfeed can take us to medieval ages and it is really shameful article. I respectfully disagree. Maybe there are more perspectives to this. For starters, the people doing the study had very publicly stated what they were looking for find. Confirmation bias did the rest. A lot of flaws are valid. First, funding from anyone is ok. What's not ok is the funder first going through various indirect channels to fund the study, and then directly being in touch with those conducting the study and even their collaborators trying to push things along. Second, not entirely the scientists fault but something that changes interpretation, is how participants were selected and who would opt in. There is an inherent bias in who will want to show up to get a blood test in the middle of a pandemic shelter in place order. Those who may have had mild symptoms or someone sick in their family and want to know if they had SAR CoV-2 are more likely especially given the way participants were recruited by email here, rather than random sampling. Third, if the test was showing a lot of false positives, this means the true %positive likely is lower than what they suggest. Lastly, look at who the lead investigator is, someone I and many others revered before reading this article. Only the highest standards are expected from someone like this. It would be standard in the industry to carefully do the basics I'm noting, make sure the test is valid, randomly sample the population etc. This is why collaborators are sour. And while we're at it, let's throw in going all over town to talk about the results before properly peer reviewing them. Seems par for the course nowadays. As they say, it takes a lifetime to build a reputation, but 15 minutes to destroy it.
Liberty Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 Fired by Trump: May 15, 2020 Steve Linick, State Department Inspector General May 1, 2020 Christi Grimm, HHS Inspector General April 7, 2020 Glenn Fine, Defense Department Inspector General April 3, 2020 Michael Atkinson , Intelligence Community Inspector General Steve Linick, State Department Inspector General - Reportedly looking into Pompeo’s “misuse of a political appointee” to perform personal tasks Christi Grimm, HHS Inspector General - Warned of “widespread” and “severe” shortages of testing supplies and PPE Glenn Fine, Defense Department Inspector General - Oversaw $2 trillion in coronavirus emergency funds Michael Atkinson , Intelligence Community Inspector General - Told Congress about whistleblower complaint that led to Impeachment https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-ramps-up-retaliatory-purge-with-firing-of-state-department-inspector-general/2020/05/16/8f8b55da-979a-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html
Investor20 Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 This looks pretty bad: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemlee/stanford-coronavirus-neeleman-ioannidis-whistleblower Liberty, I am not sure what sounds bad. In this times while the world is shut down, a test that takes $200K, a professor from Stanford had to take 5000$ to do the test which everyone agrees needs to be done? They didn't have any funds from the 2 trillion dollars to do the study? The plan was to keep making decisions without knowing the real extent of spread and who is getting how much? That is what sounds bad. Many studies (and I posted recently on this) confirmed Stanford result. The studies confirmed the Stanford study results, that there are lot of asymptomatic carriers and the infection fatality rate is much lower than thought before. The buzzfeed is an attack article because it fails to mention I believe a dozen more studies done since then by different teams across world, many of them are reputed hospitals or professors. Buzzfeed "forgets" to mention this and goes on attacking a scientist for doing his job which frankly, the task force should have done long back. We are really going back to Galileos times attacking the scientist rather than looking at the result and its confirmation in multiple studies and its consequences of this new information. This attitude of Buzzfeed can take us to medieval ages and it is really shameful article. I respectfully disagree. Maybe there are more perspectives to this. For starters, the people doing the study had very publicly stated what they were looking for find. Confirmation bias did the rest. A lot of flaws are valid. First, funding from anyone is ok. What's not ok is the funder first going through various indirect channels to fund the study, and then directly being in touch with those conducting the study and even their collaborators trying to push things along. Second, not entirely the scientists fault but something that changes interpretation, is how participants were selected and who would opt in. There is an inherent bias in who will want to show up to get a blood test in the middle of a pandemic shelter in place order. Those who may have had mild symptoms or someone sick in their family and want to know if they had SAR CoV-2 are more likely especially given the way participants were recruited by email here, rather than random sampling. Third, if the test was showing a lot of false positives, this means the true %positive likely is lower than what they suggest. Lastly, look at who the lead investigator is, someone I and many others revered before reading this article. Only the highest standards are expected from someone like this. It would be standard in the industry to carefully do the basics I'm noting, make sure the test is valid, randomly sample the population etc. This is why collaborators are sour. And while we're at it, let's throw in going all over town to talk about the results before properly peer reviewing them. Seems par for the course nowadays. As they say, it takes a lifetime to build a reputation, but 15 minutes to destroy it. The Buzzfeed article says the money was given to a fund in Stanford which in turn was given to the investigators. It was a pool of money. The allegation is Newman gave 5000$ and Stanford professors put their reputation at stake for 5000$. On the surface of this, it looks ridiculous. From Buzzfeed article "Neeleman confirmed that he made a $5,000 donation to Stanford to be given to these researchers " Your second allegation is that the authors had pre-disposed idea about the result. Any scientist has a hypothesis and they test it by an experiment. That is the way they design an experiment. An experiment is to test a hypothesis. Scientists just dont go around doing random experiments hoping to find something. This is respectfully quiet a weird accusation because that is the way every scientist works. For example, when a vaccine is tested, they design to see if the vaccine works. But of course they hope it succeeds. Otherwise, why would they even test it? And they would test something that they hope succeeds. Not every random thing is tested to see if it works against Covid infection. Lastly, no one depends on one test. So irrespective of John Ioannidis did or did not design the test well is not as important as you and these allegations are making it out to be. The real test if an experiment result is correct is if it is replicated by other teams and other data collected by alternate methods. I have posted in this thread several antibody tests since done (Eg. Denmark, Miami-dade county, NY state). All of them came to same conclusion. The number of infected is at least a magnitude (10 fold) higher than the official confirmed cases. When the denominator is 10 fold (or even more), the Infection fatality rate would be 10 fold+ smaller. I also posted several other data such as prison data where they found when randomly tested (as opposed to general practice of testing symptomatic patients), a lot of asymptomatic carriers are found. So, without quibbling about the exact design, the fundamental finding that the infected are at least 10 fold higher than confirmed cases is established IMO. So, I do not understand what is that the complaint is about when multiple antibody tests and random PCR tests gave the same result. To add one more data point. There was a large outbreak in Tennesse prisons. So, mass testing was done. One of the major out break is at Trousdale Turner Correctional facility. They had second death out of 1300 infected with 98% asymptomatic. That gives 0.15% fatality rate. The 2% symptomatic gives 50 fold higher total infected, not just 10 fold. https://www.newschannel5.com/news/more-than-1k-at-trousdale-turner-correctional-center-test-positive-for-covid-19 More than 1,300 individuals at Trousdale Turner Correctional Center have tested positive for COVID-19. analysis of the test results confirmed that 98% of those who tested positive are asymptomatic. https://www.wsmv.com/2-deaths-reported-at-trousdale-turner-corrections-center/article_0a9df156-9480-11ea-b9f7-1bf51c57343a.html The Tennessee Department of Correction is reporting a second inmate who tested positive for COVID-19 at Trousdale Turner Correctional Center in Hartsville has died. I will also refer to posting number 5426 in this thread where I posted Ohio prisons for old and sick (a nursing home of prisons) had 1.4% fatality rate. If you read John Ioannidis or his collaborator Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, they expected a high asymptomatic cases NOT from ideology as you are making it out but because of data from Cruise ships, Iceland, Repatriated from China in US airports, small Italy town, where most of the people (not just symptomatic) were tested. Like the prison data above, they calculated a high level of asymptomatic carriers and hence expected the same in the antibody test. So, overall I am not clear what the worry is. Dr. John Ioannidis said there are lot of asymptomatic carriers (at least 10 fold higher than confirmed cases), and every other test is giving the same and that is the gold standard of testing a study. If you dont like Dr. John Ioannidis study, ignore it. But the result won't change.
Liberty Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/25410/20200421/austria-90-drop-coronavirus-cases-requiring-people-wear-face-masks.htm "Austria Has 90% Drop in Coronavirus Cases After Requiring People to Wear Face Masks" If only the US could do the same rapidly and effectively and masks hadn't been politicized by imbeciles... Sad!
Spekulatius Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 Here are the antibody numbers from some harder his neighborhoods in Boston. Roughly 10% have antibodies, 2.6% were COVID-19 positive. I thought the antibody numbers would be a bit higher by now - we did have higher numbers in Chelsea (~30% and they’d a few weeks back - Chelsea is hardest hit in MA). https://www.boston.com/news/coronavirus/2020/05/15/boston-coronavirus-antibody-testing-results Herd immunity certainly a long way off. Here in the boonies, 35 miles from Boston, we haven’t even started yet. MA is in no man’s land as far as the epidemic is concerned - no herd immunity in sight, but also case numbers aren’t coming down quick enough to do control the disease, if we open up. The leaky shelter in place that we are having doesn’t really get anywhere. There probably is no choice but open up, can’t be shut down forever. Governor Baker will announce his plans tomorrow.
Investor20 Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/25410/20200421/austria-90-drop-coronavirus-cases-requiring-people-wear-face-masks.htm "Austria Has 90% Drop in Coronavirus Cases After Requiring People to Wear Face Masks" If only the US could do the same rapidly and effectively and masks hadn't been politicized by imbeciles... Sad! https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks "If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19. Wear a mask if you are coughing or sneezing." -WHO still has this on their website. Not my opinion to be clear.
Spekulatius Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 Biergarten in Bavaria are opening up again. I have been to that on on the picture. https://www.br.de/nachrichten/deutschland-welt/biergaerten-oeffnen-wieder-corona-lockerungen-in-bayern-ab-montag,RyrdS5C Regulations differ from state to state, but the basic rules are the same. Interesting, my mom told me yesterday that cafe’s and restaurants in her town are opened up last week, but every customer one needs to leave a short form with address and contact information. Likely for contact tracing if any outbreak were to occur.
Liberty Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 Face shields do seem more comfortable... https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2765525 Face shields have many advantages - cheap, widely available, effective, and preserves communication, according to JAMA paper. Let’s talk thru the compelling evidence. “Face shields offer a number of advantages. While medical masks have limited durability and little potential for reprocessing, face shields can be reused indefinitely and are easily cleaned with soap and water, or common household disinfectants.” They are comfortable to wear, protect the portals of viral entry, and reduce the potential for autoinoculation by preventing the wearer from touching their face. People wearing medical masks often have to remove them to communicate; this is not necessary with face shields.” 4) “The use of a face shield is also a reminder to maintain social distancing, but allows visibility of facial expressions and lip movements for speech perception.” 5) “Most important, face shields appear to sig reduce amount of inhalation exposure to influenza, another droplet-spread respiratory . In a simulation study, face shields were shown to reduce immediate viral exposure by 96% when worn by a simulated HCW w/in 18 inches of cough.” 8) “Face shields require no special materials for fabrication and production lines can be repurposed rapidly. Numerous companies, including Apple, Nike, GM, and John Deere, have all started producing face shields; can be made from materials found in craft or office supply stores. No burden of 100% efficacy should be placed on face shields or any containment policy because this level of control is both impossible to achieve and unnecessary to drive SARS-CoV-2 infection levels into a manageable range.”
Liberty Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/25410/20200421/austria-90-drop-coronavirus-cases-requiring-people-wear-face-masks.htm "Austria Has 90% Drop in Coronavirus Cases After Requiring People to Wear Face Masks" If only the US could do the same rapidly and effectively and masks hadn't been politicized by imbeciles... Sad! https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks "If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19. Wear a mask if you are coughing or sneezing." -WHO still has this on their website. Not my opinion to be clear. Yeah, that was a lie (likely with the good intention of stopping a run on scarce PPE in the early days). Now do Trump’s lies instead of cherry picking. He’s in charge in the US, not the WHO. No other competent countries have been stopped by this.. because they’re trying to defeat the virus rather than look for others to blame.
Spekulatius Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 COVID-19 death likely undercounted (Nate Silver): https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1262026365907410949?s=21
Gregmal Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/25410/20200421/austria-90-drop-coronavirus-cases-requiring-people-wear-face-masks.htm "Austria Has 90% Drop in Coronavirus Cases After Requiring People to Wear Face Masks" If only the US could do the same rapidly and effectively and masks hadn't been politicized by imbeciles... Sad! https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks "If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19. Wear a mask if you are coughing or sneezing." -WHO still has this on their website. Not my opinion to be clear. Yeah, that was a lie (likely with the good intention of stopping a run on scarce PPE in the early days). Now do Trump’s lies instead of cherry picking. He’s in charge in the US, not the WHO. No other competent countries have been stopped by this.. because they’re trying to defeat the virus rather than look for others to blame. If you are capable of being objective...you dont think the current state of politics, and especially the way Trump behaves towards folks he views as "the opposition" is in any way the result of literally everyone being out to bring him down? Guy fucks up a lot, but to most of the media and liberals, he cant do anything right. I remember specifically Ivanka announcing that they had agreed to some sort of program designed to help families with paid maternity leave and childcare... a good thing in any context, and both the media and all the Twitter mouthpieces responded like a bunch of mouth foaming retards with vitriol. Guy cant wish people Merry Christmas and even get a "you too" back from his critics. Its almost always a "fuck you" if not worse. So he gives it back and then some. When you play a win at all costs game of politics, this is the result. Both parties are to blame, and the way Trump acts in many instances is obviously, how you have to play in order to defeat it. Romney was a gentlemen, and look what you guys did to him when he ran... it is indeed why Trump is a terrible leader during dire situations like this when everyone needs to be coming together, but at the same time, its the beast you guys created with the identity politics and half ass application of metoo and all that other nonsense. Romney probably doesnt look so bad now does he? And he could have been your 2016 Republican nominee, but, you guys rejected him 2012 cuz he travelled with his dog crate on the roof or something...
RichardGibbons Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 If you are capable of being objective...you dont think the current state of politics, and especially the way Trump behaves towards folks he views as "the opposition" is in any way the result of literally everyone being out to bring him down? Guy fucks up a lot, but to most of the media and liberals, he cant do anything right. I remember specifically Ivanka announcing that they had agreed to some sort of program designed to help families with paid maternity leave and childcare... a good thing in any context, and both the media and all the Twitter mouthpieces responded like a bunch of mouth foaming retards with vitriol. Guy cant wish people Merry Christmas and even get a "you too" back from his critics. Its almost always a "fuck you" if not worse. So he gives it back and then some. When you play a win at all costs game of politics, this is the result. Both parties are to blame, and the way Trump acts in many instances is obviously, how you have to play in order to defeat it. Romney was a gentlemen, and look what you guys did to him when he ran... it is indeed why Trump is a terrible leader during dire situations like this when everyone needs to be coming together, but at the same time, its the beast you guys created with the identity politics and half ass application of metoo and all that other nonsense. Romney probably doesnt look so bad now does he? And he could have been your 2016 Republican nominee, but, you guys rejected him 2012 cuz he travelled with his dog crate on the roof or something... Cool story, dude. Let's keep going! Now tell us why Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, and Kim Jong-un are persecuted and misunderstood, and how their actions are all the fault of that darn Liberal media.
Gregmal Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 Those arent democracies with an electoral process. I mean this is basically the exact same argument bleeding heart liberal Michael Moore made and warned Democrats about, and look what they even did to him lol. Look at the playbook from McCain and Romney and then the gauntlet Trump had to run. "not part of the establishment" - great way to win over blue collar voters! "he's too rich" - Romney acted embarrassed and folded, Trump said, hell yea and flaunted his supposed wealth. One strategy worked, the other didn't The multiple, well orchestrated media leaked "bombshells" - Others fold or spend valuable time defending themselves, Trump says fuck you, fake news. What worked? This is the game you guys have created and its become ugly and win and all costs is the result. Like I said, you could have had a gentleman like Romney, but you chose instead to play identity politics and smear him, so you could "win". Now you've gotten a real monster who just plays the game better than your current candidate
cubsfan Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 The idiot Democrats hit the point of no return with Biden and Bernie. Can't turn back now on identity politics and "me too". Biden and Dems screwed themselves. If they deep six Biden, they'll be stuck with the Commie Bernie. They really wanted Andrew Cuomo as their savior - until it's apparent that he really fucked up NY by killing all the elderly packing them into CV infested nursing homes. The Democrats are their own worst enemy - almost like they are deliberately trying to hand the election to Trump. And now Obama is being outed as the head of the criminal syndicate masquerading as US President. Amazing with millions of people in the country and the Democrats can't find ONE HONEST or COMPETENT leader to run against Trump. What a fucked up Party! It's like watching a Three Stooges film fest.
Guest Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 If they go with Bernie, they might get my vote. How many pictures of him hanging out with Epstein or Weinstein? How many women have accused him of sexual harassment/assault? If Bernie did get it, I would have to vote Republicans on the rest of the ticket though. I think Bernie can be dangerous but might be decent if not given full power. I hate a lot of his polices but think he would be better for the middle class than Biden or Trump. As it stands right now, totally not voting for Biden.
DooDiligence Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 The idiot Democrats hit the point of no return with Biden and Bernie. Can't turn back now on identity politics and "me too". Biden and Dems screwed themselves. If they deep six Biden, they'll be stuck with the Commie Bernie. They really wanted Andrew Cuomo as their savior - until it's apparent that he really fucked up NY by killing all the elderly packing them into CV infested nursing homes. The Democrats are their own worst enemy - almost like they are deliberately trying to hand the election to Trump. And now Obama is being outed as the head of the criminal syndicate masquerading as US President. Amazing with millions of people in the country and the Democrats can't find ONE HONEST or COMPETENT leader to run against Trump. What a fucked up Party! It's like watching a Three Stooges film fest. Saying these things does not make them true, but that's never stopped you faux conservatives from spewing lies. BTW, you can consider it a smug little victory when I don't respond to your next bullshit troll post.
Liberty Posted May 17, 2020 Posted May 17, 2020 https://forge.medium.com/prepare-for-the-ultimate-gaslighting-6a8ce3f0a0e0
cubsfan Posted May 18, 2020 Posted May 18, 2020 Saying these things does not make them true, but that's never stopped you faux conservatives from spewing lies. BTW, you can consider it a smug little victory when I don't respond to your next bullshit troll post. Sorry to burst your bubble DooDoo. Not my fault the party is in meltdown mode. Like 2016, when the Democrats had the opportunity to win the EASIEST landslide victory of all time - they put up a terrible, horrible, unlikeable candidate in Hillary Clinton and were shocked when they lost. At least you won't be shocked this time, even after 4 years of trying to frame the current President. The Left never learns. The arrogance of the party never ceases to amaze me.
LC Posted May 18, 2020 Posted May 18, 2020 COVID-19 death likely undercounted (Nate Silver): https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1262026365907410949?s=21 Likely not under**counted. NS is relying on excess mortality numbers but not adjusting downwards for traditional completeness estimates and not adjusting downwards (or upwards) for non-COVID death trends. The former is more important. Recent weekly reports of excess mortality are adjusted upwards for incompleteness, by determined by the %s of reports completed in a certain time t, compared to prior time t-1. This method assumes that excess COVID deaths are prevalent in all incomplete geographies equally - which is most likely not the case.
meiroy Posted May 18, 2020 Posted May 18, 2020 "If you’re a thief, accuse your enemies of thievery. If corrupt, accuse your rivals of corruption. If a coward, accuse others of cowardice. Evidence is irrelevant; the goal is to dilute the truth and the case against you with “everyone does it”. Trump’s unfounded attacks on others of the things he is demonstrably guilty of aren’t a mere projection. They are a tactic to lower the moral bar for all, to wave off his corruption and abuse as normal. This has been the ploy of dictators for decades, to say that anyone accusing them of crimes is a hypocrite. Not to say they are good, but that we are all bad, that there is no good or evil, no truth, just power." --- Others surely have written it better than I can express it, but I'll say it anyhow: people don't just wake up one day and vote to turn democracy off, democracy is slowly dismantled from within, brick by brick, by useful idiots.
DooDiligence Posted May 18, 2020 Posted May 18, 2020 "If you’re a thief, accuse your enemies of thievery. If corrupt, accuse your rivals of corruption. If a coward, accuse others of cowardice. Evidence is irrelevant; the goal is to dilute the truth and the case against you with “everyone does it”. Trump’s unfounded attacks on others of the things he is demonstrably guilty of aren’t a mere projection. They are a tactic to lower the moral bar for all, to wave off his corruption and abuse as normal. This has been the ploy of dictators for decades, to say that anyone accusing them of crimes is a hypocrite. Not to say they are good, but that we are all bad, that there is no good or evil, no truth, just power." --- Others surely have written it better than I can express it, but I'll say it anyhow: people don't just wake up one day and vote to turn democracy off, democracy is slowly dismantled from within, brick by brick, by useful idiots. If this clown gets another 4 years, we are right & truly fucked.
Investor20 Posted May 18, 2020 Posted May 18, 2020 https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/25410/20200421/austria-90-drop-coronavirus-cases-requiring-people-wear-face-masks.htm "Austria Has 90% Drop in Coronavirus Cases After Requiring People to Wear Face Masks" If only the US could do the same rapidly and effectively and masks hadn't been politicized by imbeciles... Sad! https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks "If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19. Wear a mask if you are coughing or sneezing." -WHO still has this on their website. Not my opinion to be clear. Yeah, that was a lie (likely with the good intention of stopping a run on scarce PPE in the early days). Now do Trump’s lies instead of cherry picking. He’s in charge in the US, not the WHO. No other competent countries have been stopped by this.. because they’re trying to defeat the virus rather than look for others to blame. Did you forget the Surgeon Generals tweet "Seriously people - STOP BUYING MASKS!'. That is actually surgeon general of USA, not WHO. Even as recent as April 2nd Dr. Fauci was struggling to support using masks. (Dr. Fauci also works for US govt, not WHO) https://www.facebook.com/cnn/videos/213806963020721/ But Japanese, Koreans, Taiwanese...etc started using masks from January. I can understand if many people who were told for several months to not wear a mask and put in lockdown and suddenly told all you had to do is wear a mask might be little bit not convinced.
Spekulatius Posted May 18, 2020 Posted May 18, 2020 COVID-19 death likely undercounted (Nate Silver): https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1262026365907410949?s=21 Likely not overcounted. NS is relying on excess mortality numbers but not adjusting downwards for traditional completeness estimates and not adjusting downwards (or upwards) for non-COVID death trends. The former is more important. Recent weekly reports of excess mortality are adjusted upwards for incompleteness, by determined by the %s of reports completed in a certain time t, compared to prior time t-1. This method assumes that excess COVID deaths are prevalent in all incomplete geographies equally - which is most likely not the case. Thanks, I know this is your area of expertise. These excess death numbers are not without issues either, but they serve as a good sanity check for the COVID-19 related death numbers . They revealed that the U.K. for example is undercounting (they admitted such pretty much), but Belgium (which has pretty bad looking numbers ) is over counting (since they count suspect cases as COVID-19 death).
Dalal.Holdings Posted May 18, 2020 Posted May 18, 2020 "If you’re a thief, accuse your enemies of thievery. If corrupt, accuse your rivals of corruption. If a coward, accuse others of cowardice. Evidence is irrelevant; the goal is to dilute the truth and the case against you with “everyone does it”. Trump’s unfounded attacks on others of the things he is demonstrably guilty of aren’t a mere projection. They are a tactic to lower the moral bar for all, to wave off his corruption and abuse as normal. This has been the ploy of dictators for decades, to say that anyone accusing them of crimes is a hypocrite. Not to say they are good, but that we are all bad, that there is no good or evil, no truth, just power." --- Others surely have written it better than I can express it, but I'll say it anyhow: people don't just wake up one day and vote to turn democracy off, democracy is slowly dismantled from within, brick by brick, by useful idiots. False equivalence fallacy works wonders on the populace...you see it easily: Hunter Biden nepotism! (While Jared & Ivanka run pandemic response)! Biden has 1 accuser of assault! (Trump has over 25!) Her emails! His birth certificate is fake! (We haven’t even seen Trump’s tax returns) On the face of it, it’s pretty impressive how this guy’s antics work so well on some people all of the time. He surely has some great talents in manipulation... And amusing to see the Grand Unified Theory of Trumpers: “Trump’s incompetence is the fault of liberals/Obama! We wouldn’t have him if it weren’t for them! Forget the fact that I voted for and supported/support this guy!” Or more generally, The reason we have X is due to them liberals! I was never wrong! I take no responsibility!
Dalal.Holdings Posted May 18, 2020 Posted May 18, 2020 COVID-19 death likely undercounted (Nate Silver): https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1262026365907410949?s=21 Likely not overcounted. NS is relying on excess mortality numbers but not adjusting downwards for traditional completeness estimates and not adjusting downwards (or upwards) for non-COVID death trends. The former is more important. Recent weekly reports of excess mortality are adjusted upwards for incompleteness, by determined by the %s of reports completed in a certain time t, compared to prior time t-1. This method assumes that excess COVID deaths are prevalent in all incomplete geographies equally - which is most likely not the case. Thanks, I know this is your area of expertise. These excess death numbers are not without issues either, but they serve as a good sanity check for the COVID-19 related death numbers . They revealed that the U.K. for example is undercounting (they admitted such pretty much), but Belgium (which has pretty bad looking numbers ) is over counting (since they count suspect cases as COVID-19 death). Something else to think about re: excess deaths. Are deaths due to crime, auto accidents, Flu much lower than prev yrs? If so, deaths attributable to covid might be even greater than # excess deaths. Some will say that is balanced by people dying early from other medical conditions that are being neglected in hard hit areas. It’s not clear, so excess deaths might be the best proxy.
Recommended Posts