Merged Covid Megathread

Status
Not open for further replies.

flycy

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2008
2,036
2,136
113
Crescent, IA
I hear doctors all over recommending giant body condoms and breeding covid smelling and destroying rats. Most say the rats may not be terribly effective, but what the heck, it's cool.

A much critisiced study shows an IFR of 0.05% for those under 70 and 0.25% for all age groups. WHO now says 0.6% for all age groups. I guess you could interpolate they would say around a 0.12% IFR for those under 70.






1603251931267.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Informative
Reactions: Cyclonepride

Cyclonepride

Thought Police
Staff member
Apr 11, 2006
96,968
58,328
113
53
A pineapple under the sea
www.oldschoolradical.com
This is an outstanding article discussing our overall reaction to Covid (from a Canadian perspective, but still highly applicable):


"Behind claims that our political leaders are following science lies a fateful confusion. Does science mean merely the opinions of those with the right credentials, or does it refer to tested knowledge, refined by careful observation and vigorous debate? My impression is that when the premier of Ontario says he is following science, he is referring to the former — the opinions of his expert advisers — but, at the same time, invoking the aura of the latter — verifiable knowledge. The result is the worst of both worlds: we are governed by debatable positions but can make no appeal to science, since the general population has been convinced, in advance, that we are already in its capable hands.

This is a dangerous situation on two counts. First, it disables science. What is best understood as a fallible and sometimes fraught quest for reliable evidence becomes instead a pompous oracle that speaks in a single mighty voice. Second, it cripples policy. Rather than admitting to the judgments they have made, politicians shelter behind the skirts of science. This allows them to appear valiant — they are fearlessly following science — while at the same time absolving them of responsibility for the choices they have actually made or failed to make.

Science, in other words, has become a political myth — a myth quite at odds with the messy, contingent work of actual scientists. What suffers is political judgment. Politicians abdicate their duty to make the rough and ready determinations that are the stuff of politics; citizens are discouraged from thinking for themselves. With science at the helm, the role of the citizen is to stand on the sidelines and cheer, as most have done during the present crisis."
 

CloneLawman

Fortis Non Ferox
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 13, 2006
14,584
17,811
113
Wherever I go, there I am.
Does that article say 200,000 of these excess deaths are related to covid?

" Overall, an estimated 299,028 excess deaths occurred from late January through October 3, 2020, with 198,081 (66%) excess deaths attributed to COVID-19. The largest percentage increases were seen among adults aged 25–44 years and among Hispanic or Latino persons. "
 

carvers4math

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2012
20,569
16,326
113
Everyone keeps saying less deaths but we are at 28 today in Iowa and have not hit 10:00 am yet. That’s the highest I remember. I suppose the rate of death per infected is lower, and some of that is experience with treatment and some of that is vulnerable people isolating, but the high rate of infection will kill a lot of people regardless. The last three in our county were all people between 53-60.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Angie

CloniesForLife

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 22, 2015
13,965
17,741
113
Everyone keeps saying less deaths but we are at 28 today in Iowa and have not hit 10:00 am yet. That’s the highest I remember. I suppose the rate of death per infected is lower, and some of that is experience with treatment and some of that is vulnerable people isolating, but the high rate of infection will kill a lot of people regardless. The last three in our county were all people between 53-60.
Even as a nation we have plateaued for awhile and looks like we could possibly be on an uptick.

1603287918305.png
 

isutrevman

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2007
7,372
9,948
113
36
Ames, IA
Everyone keeps saying less deaths but we are at 28 today in Iowa and have not hit 10:00 am yet. That’s the highest I remember. I suppose the rate of death per infected is lower, and some of that is experience with treatment and some of that is vulnerable people isolating, but the high rate of infection will kill a lot of people regardless. The last three in our county were all people between 53-60.
Wait, is there a place that tracks covid19 deaths in real time? From what I've seen, its been extremely rare for deaths to even be reported accurately on the day they happened, much less down to the hour. Most deaths "reported" on a specific day, happened days, weeks, and sometimes even a couple months earlier.
 

madguy30

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2011
50,352
47,234
113
Even as a nation we have plateaued for awhile and looks like we could possibly be on an uptick.

View attachment 76811

While it's way less than the spring, any large uptick in cases pretty much anywhere has been followed by an uptick in deaths.

So apparently we're really not protecting the vulnerable.
 

Cyclonepride

Thought Police
Staff member
Apr 11, 2006
96,968
58,328
113
53
A pineapple under the sea
www.oldschoolradical.com
Wait, is there a place that tracks covid19 deaths in real time? From what I've seen, its been extremely rare for deaths to even be reported accurately on the day they happened, much less down to the hour. Most deaths "reported" on a specific day, happened days, weeks, and sometimes even a couple months earlier.

Yep. It's usually best to wait (see Ames being among the nation's worst "hot spots" when it was a direct result of massive testing of the inbound returning students) and see what other circumstances were. There are definitely days where a big backlog gets dropped into the stats all at once.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flycy

mynameisjonas

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2019
6,407
8,479
113
Everyone keeps saying less deaths but we are at 28 today in Iowa and have not hit 10:00 am yet. That’s the highest I remember. I suppose the rate of death per infected is lower, and some of that is experience with treatment and some of that is vulnerable people isolating, but the high rate of infection will kill a lot of people regardless. The last three in our county were all people between 53-60.
there’s simply no way that’s true, but here we go, I knew this would happen.
 

cycloneG

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2007
15,222
15,323
113
Off the grid
  • Agree
Reactions: Jer

isutrevman

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2007
7,372
9,948
113
36
Ames, IA
While it's way less than the spring, any large uptick in cases pretty much anywhere has been followed by an uptick in deaths.

So apparently we're really not protecting the vulnerable.
You can "protect the vulnerable" without being 100% at protecting them. Zero Covid isn't achievable.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: larrysarmy

madguy30

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2011
50,352
47,234
113
You can "protect the vulnerable" without being 100% at protecting them. Zero Covid isn't achievable.

I'm aware of all that but I think there are plenty of people out there that use that mantra, that don't even consider acting on it.

Like I get that someone wants to visit Grandma, and it's up to Grandma on if they want folks around, but how about at least minimize the risk for a few days before doing so.

I've read a few accounts of young parents that have their kids in all sorts of activities, still hang out with lots of friends, etc., but then don't understand why the grandparents don't visit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: isutrevman

isutrevman

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2007
7,372
9,948
113
36
Ames, IA
Which part? 31 deaths were reported in the last 24 hours.

It's true that 31 deaths were reported in 24 hours. It's not true that those 31 happened in the last 24 hours. We don't know how many were in the last 24 hours. I'm guessing around 9-10 like the daily average has been recently.

It's also not clear how many of those deaths were because of covid, or how many were hospitalized with other ailments, tested positive for covid while in the hospital, then died of other causes. Or, how many of those deaths did covid contribute to? We don't know without looking at each and every death certificate. Maybe they all genuinely died from covid. It's been very difficult to find information on that, so we don't know. We do know that for the most part, anyone testing positive within a certain timeframe of their death (2 weeks, 30 days, 60 days?) is being counted in the covid deaths tally.

 
Last edited:

isutrevman

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2007
7,372
9,948
113
36
Ames, IA
I'm aware of all that but I think there are plenty of people out there that use that mantra, that don't even consider acting on it.

Like I get that someone wants to visit Grandma, and it's up to Grandma on if they want folks around, but how about at least minimize the risk for a few days before doing so.

I've read a few accounts of young parents that have their kids in all sorts of activities, still hang out with lots of friends, etc., but then don't understand why the grandparents don't visit.
I agree it's up to individuals to "protect the vulnerable". Demanding no one visit their elderly relatives for a year or more is devastating. Your approach of minimizing your exposure risk for a few days, or a week before visiting is a great idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bozclone

mynameisjonas

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2019
6,407
8,479
113
Status
Not open for further replies.