All things Chinese CoronaVirus

[wgdsr]

MAGA Leadership?

Just the facts:

COVID Pie Chart.jpg

not a lot of context here. so in that vein, do you have one with democratic led states vs republican?

[kramerica.inc]

MAGA Leadership?

Just the facts:

COVID Pie Chart.jpg

Facts?

That chart is an inaccurate "snapshot" at best and political BS at worst.

Looks great on the surface. But the reality- ALL the stats are BS. Not one country has accurate reporting. NONE. And the stats in the US are far from accurate too. You could probably tack on thousands more here and hundreds of thousands worldwide if we had any clue when this thing hit and how long people were walking around spreading it.

No one has a real handle on this and has no clue how many people have really died from this. The numbers are likely exponentially higher than what's reported. EVERYWHERE. SO your chart is far from "facts." More like "What we think we know now, kinda" or "Guesses."

[MDlaxfan76]

exponentially higher, Kram?

Higher, yes, exponentially?

I do think that the #'s are blunt and need more context.
No doubt.

And the worst may well be yet to come all over the world.
Hope not, but it's almost surely going to be killing hundreds of thousands more worldwide, absent a breakthrough therapy or vaccine darn soon. Many will go unconfirmed, just estimated.

If we want to be political about the US response, though, the question is pretty simple.

Could we, should we, have done better, acting sooner on a variety of fronts and with more clarity of purpose?
Would that have saved lives and saved $ ?

That appears to be an unequivocal, yes.

Then we have to ask whether leadership from the POTUS would have mattered to the above?

To me, that too, is an unequivocal yes.

Then we need to ask ourselves whether the POTUS we have today is going to do any better over the next many months?
Sure hope so. Not betting on it.

The scientists are the best hope.

[CU88]

MAGA Leadership?

Just the facts:

COVID Pie Chart.jpg

not a lot of context here. so in that vein, do you have one with democratic led states vs republican?

There are no "Democrat States" or "Republican States". There is one USA.

[6ftstick]

exponentially higher, Kram?

Higher, yes, exponentially?

I do think that the #'s are blunt and need more context.
No doubt.

And the worst may well be yet to come all over the world.
Hope not, but it's almost surely going to be killing hundreds of thousands more worldwide, absent a breakthrough therapy or vaccine darn soon. Many will go unconfirmed, just estimated.

If we want to be political about the US response, though, the question is pretty simple.

Could we, should we, have done better, acting sooner on a variety of fronts and with more clarity of purpose?
Would that have saved lives and saved $ ?

That appears to be an unequivocal, yes.

Then we have to ask whether leadership from the POTUS would have mattered to the above?

To me, that too, is an unequivocal yes.

Then we need to ask ourselves whether the POTUS we have today is going to do any better over the next many months?
Sure hope so. Not betting on it.

The scientists are the best hope.

Italy coronavirus deaths 27,967
Spain coronavirus deaths 24,543
France coronavirus deaths 24,376
Germany coronavirus deaths 6,623
UK coronavirus deaths 26,771

total population 320 million

Total deaths=110,280
---------------------------------------------
United States

Total population 324 million

Total deaths 63,019
(New York/New Jersey 40% of that total)

All things considered we could be doing much worse.

[runrussellrun]

MAGA Leadership?

Just the facts:

COVID Pie Chart.jpg

not a lot of context here. so in that vein, do you have one with democratic led states vs republican?

There are no "Democrat States" or "Republican States". There is one USA.

USA

....it no longer exists......US Constitution ? How quaint ......so old school.

[njbill]

MAGA Leadership?

Just the facts:

COVID Pie Chart.jpg

not a lot of context here. so in that vein, do you have one with democratic led states vs republican?

Why is that relevant? Or are your partisan colors showing?

[wgdsr]

MAGA Leadership?

Just the facts:

COVID Pie Chart.jpg

not a lot of context here. so in that vein, do you have one with democratic led states vs republican?

Why is that relevant? Or are your partisan colors showing?

partisan to what? spelling it out... it's my opinion that there is a lot more to "the numbers" than usa has a higher % of x than the world.
and you could take that conversation in 50 different directions. or many more.
just like there's a lot more to certain states having worse numbers than others.
i pointed out the lack of context. that's why it's relevant, or actually not necessarily relevant on its face. capisce?

[jhu72]

exponentially higher, Kram?

Higher, yes, exponentially?

I do think that the #'s are blunt and need more context.
No doubt.

And the worst may well be yet to come all over the world.
Hope not, but it's almost surely going to be killing hundreds of thousands more worldwide, absent a breakthrough therapy or vaccine darn soon. Many will go unconfirmed, just estimated.

If we want to be political about the US response, though, the question is pretty simple.

Could we, should we, have done better, acting sooner on a variety of fronts and with more clarity of purpose?
Would that have saved lives and saved $ ?

That appears to be an unequivocal, yes.

Then we have to ask whether leadership from the POTUS would have mattered to the above?

To me, that too, is an unequivocal yes.

Then we need to ask ourselves whether the POTUS we have today is going to do any better over the next many months?
Sure hope so. Not betting on it.

The scientists are the best hope.

Italy coronavirus deaths 27,967
Spain coronavirus deaths 24,543
France coronavirus deaths 24,376
Germany coronavirus deaths 6,623
UK coronavirus deaths 26,771

total population 320 million

Total deaths=110,280
---------------------------------------------
United States

Total population 324 million

Total deaths 63,019
(New York/New Jersey 40% of that total)

All things considered we could be doing much worse.

… all things considered we could be doing a lot better.

[njbill]

MAGA Leadership?

Just the facts:

COVID Pie Chart.jpg

not a lot of context here. so in that vein, do you have one with democratic led states vs republican?

Why is that relevant? Or are your partisan colors showing?

partisan to what? spelling it out... it's my opinion that there is a lot more to "the numbers" than usa has a higher % of x than the world.
and you could take that conversation in 50 different directions. or many more.
just like there's a lot more to certain states having worse numbers than others.
i pointed out the lack of context. that's why it's relevant, or actually not necessarily relevant on its face. capisce?

Partisan to your political leanings. Please. If you were truly interested in more detailed data, you would have asked for a breakdown for each state. Again, what relevance is there to whether the state is led by a democrat or a republican? Other than the obvious one to try to further your political agenda?

[wgdsr]

MAGA Leadership?

Just the facts:

COVID Pie Chart.jpg

not a lot of context here. so in that vein, do you have one with democratic led states vs republican?

Why is that relevant? Or are your partisan colors showing?

partisan to what? spelling it out... it's my opinion that there is a lot more to "the numbers" than usa has a higher % of x than the world.
and you could take that conversation in 50 different directions. or many more.
just like there's a lot more to certain states having worse numbers than others.
i pointed out the lack of context. that's why it's relevant, or actually not necessarily relevant on its face. capisce?

Partisan to your political leanings. Please. If you were truly interested in more detailed data, you would have asked for a breakdown for each state. Again, what relevance is there to whether the state is led by a democrat or a republican? Other than the obvious one to try to further your political agenda?

you don't know me very well. it was a rhetorical question. it was a point made. i don't need the answer as i already know what it is. the relevance is that local leaders have a good deal of influence in how their state/city/county is operated.
it's my opinion many share "blame" for where we are if you want to call it that, but also that there are many things about this virus that dictate that no one has all the right answers. and many politicians have made missteps as a result. both sides. the virus is teaching us more every day, i can only hope we learn from mistakes made and construct a cogent plan. locally and nationally.

i have a lot more hope that decent execution lies with the people, not the rule makers at this point.

again, my opinion. your mileage may differ.

[RedFromMI]

In Search of the COVID19 ‘IFR’

(Infection Fatality Rate)

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/in ... ovid19-ifr

How deadly is COVID19? The question has mobilized countless researchers, become a political football around the globe and probably occurred to and triggered fear in the minds of most members of the human species. The question can be posed in various ways. But the closest to what people likely mean by it is what epidemiologists call an ‘IFR’, an infection mortality rate. That is to say, the percentage of people who will die from COVID19 after being infected by it. That’s different from the number of ‘cases’ since some infections never show symptoms and many never get recorded in any medical or governmental dataset.

The epidemic in New York City allows us to make initial calculations which, though imperfect, move us toward a real estimate as opposed to inferences, history and guesswork. For each variable in the formula we have an actual number based in science and quality record keeping, even if each is subject to substantial uncertainty and revision.

The population of New York City, according to the 2018 Census estimate, is 8,398,748 people.

The most recent estimate from New York State’s on-going blood antibody (serology) testing suggests that 24.7% of New York City residents have COVID19 antibodies and were infected with the disease. (We don’t know precisely when these tests were conducted – probably about one week ago. There’s a couple week lag before you develop antibodies.) If we apply that percentage to the city population we get 2,074,490 infections in the city.

New mortality data updated this afternoon shows the total number of confirmed (lab test) and probable (diagnosed without a test) COVID19 deaths is 18,231.

If we take those deaths and that total number of infections we get a death rate of .878%. We can round it to .9%.

So in this estimate, using data from NYC, just under 1% of the population infected with CV-19 die. Roughly a factor of 10 higher than the flu.

This number is certainly subject to revision - it is only an estimate that further information will likely refine. But the likely final result should not be as low as the typical flu number (around a tenth of a percent).

[njbill]

That’s about a 100% deflection from your original post which, by the way, did not pose a rhetorical question.

I read your posts. I draw my conclusions about your opinions and leanings from what you write.

[wgdsr]

That’s about a 100% deflection from your original post which, by the way, did not pose a rhetorical question.

I read your posts. I draw my conclusions about your opinions and leanings from what you write.

you are wrong, also attacking me. good for you. so i'll bite back... you don't seem to comprehend things very well. even when spelled out for you. at least not this. oh, well.

[MDlaxfan76]

exponentially higher, Kram?

Higher, yes, exponentially?

I do think that the #'s are blunt and need more context.
No doubt.

And the worst may well be yet to come all over the world.
Hope not, but it's almost surely going to be killing hundreds of thousands more worldwide, absent a breakthrough therapy or vaccine darn soon. Many will go unconfirmed, just estimated.

If we want to be political about the US response, though, the question is pretty simple.

Could we, should we, have done better, acting sooner on a variety of fronts and with more clarity of purpose?
Would that have saved lives and saved $ ?

That appears to be an unequivocal, yes.

Then we have to ask whether leadership from the POTUS would have mattered to the above?

To me, that too, is an unequivocal yes.

Then we need to ask ourselves whether the POTUS we have today is going to do any better over the next many months?
Sure hope so. Not betting on it.

The scientists are the best hope.

Italy coronavirus deaths 27,967
Spain coronavirus deaths 24,543
France coronavirus deaths 24,376
Germany coronavirus deaths 6,623
UK coronavirus deaths 26,771

total population 320 million

Total deaths=110,280
---------------------------------------------
United States

Total population 324 million

Total deaths 63,019
(New York/New Jersey 40% of that total)

All things considered we could be doing much worse.

Sure. Definitely could be worse.
Personally, I like Germany's ratio.
Population of 83 million, 6,623 deaths...so US is 4X pop, 10X deaths.
Of course, this is just round one of this battle, so #'s and ratio could change in future rounds, but right now they have done way, way better than us.

The Germans are the most analogous country in Europe to our own.
In general, they look pretty dismissively at France, worse at Spain, and really down their noses at Italy.

The UK made a tragic error of mirroring Trump's dismissiveness of the threat.

But hey, if we just focus on one piece of the US, New York State. 55k sq miles, pop. 19.45 million ; Germany 138k sq miles, pop 83 million...so, basically NYS is 1/4 the size of Germany, yet has almost 4X the deaths. Want to add in Connecticut and New Jersey?

Or, hey, we could look at our neighbors to the north. Canada is physically larger than the US, but only 37 million people (mostly concentrated in only part), so about 1/9th in pop. 3,387 deaths. So, the US is 9X more people, about 20X deaths.

[njbill]

That’s about a 100% deflection from your original post which, by the way, did not pose a rhetorical question.

I read your posts. I draw my conclusions about your opinions and leanings from what you write.

you are wrong, also attacking me. good for you. so i'll bite back... you don't seem to comprehend things very well. even when spelled out for you. at least not this. oh, well.

Nope. Not attacking you at all. You are entitled to your political leanings just like everyone else. Not sure why you are so sensitive when they are pointed out.

I’m done on this one. If you want to have the last word, have at it.

[wgdsr]

In Search of the COVID19 ‘IFR’

(Infection Fatality Rate)

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/in ... ovid19-ifr

How deadly is COVID19? The question has mobilized countless researchers, become a political football around the globe and probably occurred to and triggered fear in the minds of most members of the human species. The question can be posed in various ways. But the closest to what people likely mean by it is what epidemiologists call an ‘IFR’, an infection mortality rate. That is to say, the percentage of people who will die from COVID19 after being infected by it. That’s different from the number of ‘cases’ since some infections never show symptoms and many never get recorded in any medical or governmental dataset.

The epidemic in New York City allows us to make initial calculations which, though imperfect, move us toward a real estimate as opposed to inferences, history and guesswork. For each variable in the formula we have an actual number based in science and quality record keeping, even if each is subject to substantial uncertainty and revision.

The population of New York City, according to the 2018 Census estimate, is 8,398,748 people.

The most recent estimate from New York State’s on-going blood antibody (serology) testing suggests that 24.7% of New York City residents have COVID19 antibodies and were infected with the disease. (We don’t know precisely when these tests were conducted – probably about one week ago. There’s a couple week lag before you develop antibodies.) If we apply that percentage to the city population we get 2,074,490 infections in the city.

New mortality data updated this afternoon shows the total number of confirmed (lab test) and probable (diagnosed without a test) COVID19 deaths is 18,231.

If we take those deaths and that total number of infections we get a death rate of .878%. We can round it to .9%.

So in this estimate, using data from NYC, just under 1% of the population infected with CV-19 die. Roughly a factor of 10 higher than the flu.

This number is certainly subject to revision - it is only an estimate that further information will likely refine. But the likely final result should not be as low as the typical flu number (around a tenth of a percent).

they don't have anything reasonably accurate with respect to antibody testing. can't do that until they get more comprehensive. as an example, i think the 24.7% number was taken from a statewide survey of 3,000 people. how many were in ny? don't know but given they were sampling all over the state maybe not a very large number. their cohorts were often those that were at supermarkets. random samplings that could have all sorts of error.
the number could be a quarter of that or twice that.
also, i haven't seen much on elder care and nursing homes in ny, how many died were elderly as a %... did it race thru a number of nursing homes and cause what likely would be awful damage?
i did see three different studies that seemed "robust" and they all had pegged their estimate @ b/t 0.35%- 0.4% independently, using different inputs, etc.

[wgdsr]

That’s about a 100% deflection from your original post which, by the way, did not pose a rhetorical question.

I read your posts. I draw my conclusions about your opinions and leanings from what you write.

you are wrong, also attacking me. good for you. so i'll bite back... you don't seem to comprehend things very well. even when spelled out for you. at least not this. oh, well.

Nope. Not attacking you at all. You are entitled to your political leanings just like everyone else. Not sure why you are so sensitive when they are pointed out.

I’m done on this one. If you want to have the last word, have at it.

no worries, mate. i'm sure most everyone else on here can read and comprehend the dialogue. and who came on with "an agenda". peace.

[RedFromMI]

In Search of the COVID19 ‘IFR’

(Infection Fatality Rate)

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/in ... ovid19-ifr

How deadly is COVID19? The question has mobilized countless researchers, become a political football around the globe and probably occurred to and triggered fear in the minds of most members of the human species. The question can be posed in various ways. But the closest to what people likely mean by it is what epidemiologists call an ‘IFR’, an infection mortality rate. That is to say, the percentage of people who will die from COVID19 after being infected by it. That’s different from the number of ‘cases’ since some infections never show symptoms and many never get recorded in any medical or governmental dataset.

The epidemic in New York City allows us to make initial calculations which, though imperfect, move us toward a real estimate as opposed to inferences, history and guesswork. For each variable in the formula we have an actual number based in science and quality record keeping, even if each is subject to substantial uncertainty and revision.

The population of New York City, according to the 2018 Census estimate, is 8,398,748 people.

The most recent estimate from New York State’s on-going blood antibody (serology) testing suggests that 24.7% of New York City residents have COVID19 antibodies and were infected with the disease. (We don’t know precisely when these tests were conducted – probably about one week ago. There’s a couple week lag before you develop antibodies.) If we apply that percentage to the city population we get 2,074,490 infections in the city.

New mortality data updated this afternoon shows the total number of confirmed (lab test) and probable (diagnosed without a test) COVID19 deaths is 18,231.

If we take those deaths and that total number of infections we get a death rate of .878%. We can round it to .9%.

So in this estimate, using data from NYC, just under 1% of the population infected with CV-19 die. Roughly a factor of 10 higher than the flu.

This number is certainly subject to revision - it is only an estimate that further information will likely refine. But the likely final result should not be as low as the typical flu number (around a tenth of a percent).

they don't have anything reasonably accurate with respect to antibody testing. can't do that until they get more comprehensive. as an example, i think the 24.7% number was taken from a statewide survey of 3,000 people. how many were in ny? don't know but given they were sampling all over the state maybe not a very large number. their cohorts were often those that were at supermarkets. random samplings that could have all sorts of error.
the number could be a quarter of that or twice that.
also, i haven't seen much on elder care and nursing homes in ny, how many died were elderly as a %... did it race thru a number of nursing homes and cause what likely would be awful damage?
i did see three different studies that seemed "robust" and they all had pegged their estimate @ b/t 0.35%- 0.4% independently, using different inputs, etc.

The 24% number is broken out for NYC. Not sure of the error bars, as I don't have the underlying data. Data was taken outside of groceries/big box stores, so there could be a selection error as well.

Even the 0.4% numbers are quite a bit higher than the flu - and given the side effects/damage this does longer term (heart, liver, kidneys, and of course lungs along with affecting clotting) a much more dangerous disease.

[old salt]

Personally, I like Germany's ratio.
Population of 83 million, 6,623 deaths...so US is 4X pop, 10X deaths.
Of course, this is just round one of this battle, so #'s and ratio could change in future rounds, but right now they have done way, way better than us.

The Germans are the most analogous country in Europe to our own.
In general, they look pretty dismissively at France, worse at Spain, and really down their noses at Italy.

The UK made a tragic error of mirroring Trump's dismissiveness of the threat.

But hey, if we just focus on one piece of the US, New York State. 55k sq miles, pop. 19.45 million ; Germany 138k sq miles, pop 83 million...so, basically NYS is 1/4 the size of Germany, yet has almost 4X the deaths. Want to add in Connecticut and New Jersey?

Or, hey, we could look at our neighbors to the north. Canada is physically larger than the US, but only 37 million people (mostly concentrated in only part), so about 1/9th in pop. 3,387 deaths. So, the US is 9X more people, about 20X deaths.

No. The US is more comparable to Europe in it's entirety, rather than just Germany, In size, dispersal & diversity.

Look at how much of the US upon which you dismissively look down your nose.