Wuhan Coronavirus

[Old Dog New Trick]

Yeah but, they could only attribute 262 deaths to corona yesterday and that is the whole US total for one day. Eight of those came from New York where they are rolling out phase III of recovery.

In other MSM news over 54,000 people (who a majority were likely practicing social distancing rules and wearing masks) tested positive for the having the virus. But let’s blame it on river rafting, drinking and going to the beach. Not that masks are ineffective for controlling the airborne spread of the virus from infected people wearing a mask.

In not so other news reported from the MSM, no one participating in protests and riots have tested positive for the virus so that activity is being allowed by the same governors and mayors who have locked down their states and cities for legitimate businesses and social gatherings of family members and close friends.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Old Dog New Trick

In not so other news reported from the MSM, no one participating in protests and riots have tested positive for the virus so that activity is being allowed by the same governors and mayors who have locked down their states and cities for legitimate businesses and social gatherings of family members and close friends.

You got me LMAO. I'm sure the 52 positives out of the 411,000 who physically voted in the spring primary here didn't have a problem admitting where they were when asked.

Does everyone at these riots suddenly go docile if they get tested and admit they were at a Marxists Act Out celebration? That's data the PH people are not likely to ever get so let's "give 'em room to riot."

"But ain't these new Nikes lookin' good?"

[Airbornelawyer]

The media continues to report on the "spike" in cases without noting there is no spike in hospitalizations or deaths. They are especially breathless in their reporting on certain states outside the Northeast with Republican governors and/or legislatures.

This prompted me to look at the date I published up-thread less than a week ago. Since I posted that data as of 30 June, the case fatality rate has fallen in Florida from 2.4% to 1.89%, in Texas from 1.57% to 1.35%, in Oklahoma from 3.09% to 2.54%, in Arizona from 2.13% to 1.91% (1.80% for confirmed cases/deaths), and in Georgia from 3.51% to 3.06%. For the US as a whole, it has dropped from 4.91% as of 30 June to 4.56% as of 5 July.

As has been said repeatedly, but it is helpful to keep reminding ourselves, a CFR is a crude measure, especially in the midst of a health crisis, because the numerator (deaths) and denominator (cases) keep changing. But the trend itself is worth knowing, and it is good to see it moving in the right direction.

There are a few exceptions, primarily in the Northeastern US hotspots, but even there it is a case of the rate holding steady or declining only slightly. New Hampshire had a slight uptick from 6.37% to 6.42%, but small sample size is a factor there.

On a separate but related note, I still have not figured out why with as bad as Covid-19 has been in LTC facilities, it is still safer to be in a US nursing home than in the entire country of France. This is not just a knock on France; it is merely the worst of a cluster of Western European nations with double-digit fatality rates. Did they mishandle their response that badly or callously? Did their primarily state-run health care systems simply triage a bunch of elderly patients as not worth saving? Or are they simply not testing or collecting data the same way, so it is an apples to oranges comparison?

[Old Dog New Trick]

Originally Posted by Airbornelawyer

On a separate but related note, I still have not figured out why with as bad as Covid-19 has been in LTC facilities, it is still safer to be in a US nursing home than in the entire country of France. This is not just a knock on France; it is merely the worst of a cluster of Western European nations with double-digit fatality rates. Did they mishandle their response that badly or callously? Did their primarily state-run health care systems simply triage a bunch of elderly patients as not worth saving? Or are they simply not testing or collecting data the same way, so it is an apples to oranges comparison?

IMHO - this has all been apples to some other fruit (including raisins.) I doubt we even know the validity of the tests being conducted in other countries. The WHO is still being very duplicitous and obfuscating what it knew and when it knew. The EU continues to fling poo at the US even though it’s becoming evident the spread of the virus to the world was through Europe and the mutations of the virus have happened in Europe making it more deadly than the Chinese strain.

Our LTC problem was a failure from the get-go to secure those facilities quickly enough and use long standing “infectious control” protocols to prevent the spread of infectious diseases from staff members who likely created a pipeline from in-home-care, hospital wards and nursing home without following sanitation guidelines. That and “orders” to return known infected patients back to LTC facilities for EOL comfort care. An investigation needs to be done from Washington to New York to find out why so many of these patients died from COVID-19 and how they were exposed.

My guess is several countries are not publicly providing data to limit world scorn and leadership embarrassment. China still leads the way!

The only thing ‘orange’ is “Orange Man Bad” and that’s the MSM narrative until election results come in.

On a supporting note, what’s gonna happen when we reach 100,000,000 positive tests, an unreported number of negative results and an estimated number of COVID deaths at (hopefully) less than 250,000?

Can we then say the ‘scientists’ (like Bill Gates and Bill Nye) are not only wrong on infectious diseases but perhaps they are wrong on climate change and just about every other hypothesis they have peddled for the last 30+ years?

Can a “brain fart” be called a “Fauci” moment in the future?

[JJ_BPK]

Question: Is this the way intubated patients are "staged"?

The pic was posted on FB by a non-medical HS classmate.
Just does not look correct

Thanks

[Razor]

It looks like prone positioning may be helpful to ARDS recovery.

"Prone Position in Management of COVID-19 Patients; a Commentary"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7158870/

[Airbornelawyer]

Before I delve into a little more number-crunching, a question (actually two) for those of you with a background in statistics or epidemiology. As has been repeatedly pointed out, one problem with the case fatality rate measure is the changing denominator as more people get tested. So, first question, given that we are unlikely to test 100% of the population, at what point do you consider the amount of testing to be statistically significant and thus close to giving us reliable numbers? And second but related to the first, given that the testing currently being done is generally not random, is this useless for drawing reliable conclusions?

For reference, as of yesterday, California with a population of 39.5 million, had conducted 4.8 million tests, so about 12% of the population (give or take, since some people have likely been tested more than once, and some were from out of state). A random sample of tests as a rough percentage of population for other states include Connecticut - 14.6%, Florida - 10.4%, Georgia - 10.6%, Illinois - 14.0%, and Virginia - 9.2%. I would guess that most other states are also around 10% or so.

And now, back to the number-crunching. As a few articles or internet posts have noted, for all the panic and locking down of the entire economy and society over the past few months, Covid-19 primarily only seriously affects the elderly, especially those with co-morbidities. For most others, it may not be much worse that the seasonal flu. In general, about 80-85% of deaths have been of people over 70 and about 90-95% have been of those over 60.

Here are a few numbers to give this context. Note that different states record data differently.

California:
Age 0-17: no deaths; CFR = 0
Age 18-49: 384 deaths in 178767 cases; CFR = 0.24%
Age 50-64: 1044 deaths in 54836 cases; CFR = 1.90%
Age 65 + : 4872 deaths in 35441 cases; CFR = 13.75%

Connecticut:
Age 0-19: 2 deaths in 1068 cases; CFR= 0.19%
Age 20-39: 25 deaths in 12396 cases; CFR= 0.20%
Age 40-59: 232 deaths in 14535 cases; CFR= 1.60%
Age 60-69: 533 deaths in 6551 cases; CFR= 8.14%
Age 70-79: 945 deaths in 4416 cases; CFR= 21.40%
Age 80 +: 2601 deaths in 6952 cases; CFR= 34.71%

Recall that Connecticut's overall fatality rate is worst among the 50 states.

Florida:
Age 0-14: 1 death in 9847 cases; CFR = 0.01%
Age 15-34: 28 deaths in 75301 cases; CFR = 0.03%
Age 35-54: 218 deaths in 63889 cases; CFR = 0.34%
Age 55-64: 342 deaths in 24774 cases; CFR = 1.38%
Age 65-74: 784 deaths in 14852 cases; CFR = 5.28%
Age 75-84: 1056 deaths in 8829 cases; CFR = 11.96%
Age 85 + : 1349 deaths in 5561 cases; CFR = 24.26%

Illinois:
Age 0-19: 4 deaths in 11519 cases; CFR= 0.03%
Age 20-39: 135 deaths in 49388 cases; CFR= 0.27%
Age 40-59: 829 deaths in 50321 cases; CFR= 1.65%
Age 60-69: 1253 deaths in 17151 cases; CFR= 7.31%
Age 70-79: 1678 deaths in 9534 cases; CFR= 17.60%
Age 80 +: 3127 deaths in 9895 cases; CFR= 31.60%

More children have been killed by gunfire in the last 2 weeks in Chicago alone than have died of Covid-19 in the entire state this year.

Virginia:
Age 0-19: 0 deaths in 7008 cases; CFR= 0%
Age 20-39: 17 deaths in 23510 cases; CFR= 0.07%
Age 40-59: 158 deaths in 21610 cases; CFR= 0.73%
Age 60-69: 267 deaths in 6486 cases; CFR= 4.12%
Age 70-79: 461 deaths in 3378 cases; CFR= 13.65%
Age 80 +: 948 deaths in 3473 cases; CFR= 27.30%

Federal Republic of Germany:
Age 0-19: 3 deaths in 14560 cases; CFR= 0.02%
Age 20-49: 107 deaths in 86421 cases; CFR= 0.12%
Age 50-69: 1181 deaths in 59519 cases; CFR= 1.98%
Age 70-89: 6029 deaths in 30279 cases; CFR= 19.91%
Age 90 +: 1691 deaths in 5359 cases; CFR= 31.55%

In Germany, people over 70 account for 86% of all Covid deaths. People over 50 account for 98.8%. That may be one of the reasons why Germany was among the first places to reopen schools, even as other large events, such as Oktoberfest, which draw an older population, have remained cancelled.

Also looking at German data, I note that I gave a CFR of 4.6% above for the country as a whole. Four states were higher than this average: Saarland at 6.2%, Bavaria at 5.33%, Baden-Württemberg at 5.13% and Hamburg at 5.00%. Hamburg is a densely-populated city-state, so a higher rate stands to reason. The main thing the other three states seem to have in common is they border Austria, Switzerland and France, so they were likely the first places in Germany affected as the pandemic spread from Italy north. Germany on the whole has a somewhat older population than the US, but I am not sure how these states compare to other states. Despite their higher population densities, Berlin and North Rhine-Westphalia were below the German average.

I can't get a good number for LTC facility deaths in Germany, because German law categorizes LTCs along with a number of other high-occupancy facilities, so the German number includes not just nursing homes, but homeless shelters, refugee/asylum-seeker facilities and prison.

Regarding France, there does seem to be some defensiveness from French sources about their high death rate, as well as a bit of playing the blame game, especially with regard to countries like Germany allegedly hoarding PPE. I also looked at some data from the Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques. As high as they is, the overall numbers for France are relatively unchanged over recent weeks as the crisis there is essentially over, not that politicians and bureaucrats seem willing to admit it and let a crisis go to waste. Since the beginning of May, the daily mortality rate for all deaths in France has returned to the average of previous years (chart here). In fact, deaths are in many cases lower than in previous years, suggesting either that the lockdowns reduced mortality in other areas such as traffic accidents, or that Covid-19 killed many people in March and April who would have died in May, June or later anyway. There is a breakdown by age, but it only covers those who died in hospitals.

[Pete]

There is a story today in the NYT that the title runs "DNA inherited from Neanderthals may increase risk of Covid-19"

Behind a paywall

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/04/h...?smid=tw-share

"A stretch of DNA linked to Covid-19 was passed down from Neanderthals 60,000 years ago, according to a new study.

Scientists don’t yet know why this particular segment increases the risk of severe illness from the coronavirus. But the new findings, which were posted online on Friday and have not yet been published in a scientific journal, show how some clues to modern health stem from ancient history.

“This interbreeding effect that happened 60,000 years ago is still having an impact today,” said Joshua Akey, a geneticist at Princeton University who was not involved in the new study.

This piece of the genome, which spans six genes on Chromosome 3, has had a puzzling journey through human history, the study found. The variant is now common in Bangladesh, where 63 percent of people carry at least one copy. Across all of South Asia, almost one-third of people have inherited the segment...."

This is the first I heard about the number of people in southern Asia with Neanderthal Chromosome 3.

I've read that the highest concentration of Neanderthal DNA was in people in broadly N/W Europe.

[Box]

Originally Posted by Airbornelawyer

Before I delve into a little more number-crunching, a question (actually two)...

I hated Business statistics. It made me sick to my stomach. The only subject that gave me worse nightmares was when physics would sneak its way into my astronomy class. Statistics are the science of the devil. Statistics don’t lie – but if I manipulate my data sample, I can HONESTLY make hair loss and premature ejaculation look like the harbingers of biblical Armageddon.
These insidious COVID-19 panic-porn cock suckers have successfully conflated their infected sample size with the overarching global demographic and are using it told the entire human race hostage.
IT.JUST.ISNT.TURE

So, without further adieu, I offer my opinion...
…and we all know the true value of my opinion. Just this weekend I attempted to purchase a small bag of Black Rifle Coffee from a local vendor using my opinion and good looks – I successfully brewed my next cup of Joe using a K-Cup of Victor Allens French Roast that I purchased in bulk after my opinion and good looks failed to score so much as a wiff of the BRC blend.

The amount of data collection needed to be statistically significant always depends on the desired end state. In other words what is the goal of compiling and analyzing these statistics? Ideally the larger the sample and the fewer the variables, the more accurate your results will be. Right now we are being forced to draw broad conclusions from a very ill defined data set. I think we already have significant statistical data to show that COVID-19 "statistically" concentrates itself in the demographic known as "sick old people"
Everything else is little more than a Semi-scientific Wild-Assed Guess.

…given that the testing currently being done is generally not random, is this useless for drawing reliable conclusions?
Not only is the current data collection pretty much the OPPOSITE of random, the folks collecting the data are in a constant state of moving the goal posts. This type of data collection as part of an epidemiologic study is about as “effective as trying to solve an algebra equation by chewing bubble gum.” If I have a set of dice, I can roll them and expect a generally random outcome based on each die having six sides with unique numbers. I can draw reliable conclusions by repeating the experiment a set number of times and recording the results. If one of these dice is “loaded” my testing is no longer random and my conclusions are not reliable.

Coronavirus testing is being done with loaded dice. There is no random testing. People that are not sick, have no symptoms, and have no direct exposure to a known COVID-19 patient have no reason to be tested. Conflating any results with the broader cross section of society is wildly inaccurate. Those who would present those results as factual are not only being intellectually dishonest, the fact that they are presenting their findings in an environment that directly impacts the very fabric of our society represents some of the most unethical professional conduct that I can imagine.
You might as well let Bernie Madoff explain the statistical analysis before Reverend Fauci preaches about it on CNN.


Just my two cents for now...............

[Last hard class]

So. If everyone over 50 were to die we could wrap this thing up and put a bow on it.
I think they already made that movie.


How to determine a statistic's validity?
Democrats utilize confirmation bias. Republicans practice motivated reasoning.




LHC

[Box]

I believe it goes well beyond applying a partisan identification to the concepts of confirmation bias or motivated reasoning.

**Democrats could easily be accused of motivational reasoning; “the current POTUS is evil – his rote mismanagement of the pandemic” is all the emotional motivation a democrat need to go off the rails to drive their argument that we’re all going to die if we don’t wear a mask. Pretty easily supported by their literal admission on the left that:
they'd rather see the economy crash than to see Trump reelected
any of Joe Biden's accused evils are better than any positive impacts that Trump may have had on the economy
hell, even the Ragin-Cajun just said he'd support a Biden-Palin ticket if it meant beating Trump

**The refusal to accept any truth beyond “this is all just a shadow government attempt at harming the POTUS politically” is all the confirmation bias that a republican needs to prove that COVID-19 is just a weak and fabricated version of the common flu that only attacks less than 1% of the global populace.
...because anything Trump Tweets is acceptable as long a sit targets leftists
...anything the POTUS does is acceptable as long as it keeps the left on their heels

The changing versions of “truth” that we have all been watching unfold over the last several months are neither accurate NOR scientific.

It is my own opinion (based on my admittedly biased, partisan, and wildly hypocritical ideology) that the global community was intentionally “spooked” early on – and that the INTENTIONAL panic UNINTENTIONALLY spiraled out of control before the purveyors of premature panic porn had given any thought to the consequences. None of the partisan hacks (from either side of the aisle) will ever come clean – especially the dirty…
…dirty
…dirty, democrats

[rsdengler]

Originally Posted by Box

None of the partisan hacks (from either side of the aisle) will ever come clean – especially the dirty…
…dirty
…dirty, democrats

Maybe the "dirty Demowhacks" need a bit of soap, in all the right spots.....Politics is a f'ing ground in dirty business. And Politicians are that speck of ground dirt you just cannot get out of your carpet. Let's fudge numbers, because it's all about control and manipulation of the public. Some follow, some rightfully give the middle finger....Life is grand isn't it?

[Box]

Originally Posted by rsdengler

Politicians are that speck of ground dirt you just cannot get out of your carpet...

Just my two cents - but "we the people" can absitivley posolutely get the dirt out of the carpet - "we the people" are all just too damn lazy to get the vacuum cleaner out of the closet.

[Trapper John]

Originally Posted by Box

I hated Business statistics. It made me sick to my stomach. The only subject that gave me worse nightmares was when physics would sneak its way into my astronomy class. Statistics are the science of the devil. Statistics don’t lie – but if I manipulate my data sample, I can HONESTLY make hair loss and premature ejaculation look like the harbingers of biblical Armageddon.
These insidious COVID-19 panic-porn cock suckers have successfully conflated their infected sample size with the overarching global demographic and are using it told the entire human race hostage.
IT.JUST.ISNT.TURE

So, without further adieu, I offer my opinion...
…and we all know the true value of my opinion. Just this weekend I attempted to purchase a small bag of Black Rifle Coffee from a local vendor using my opinion and good looks – I successfully brewed my next cup of Joe using a K-Cup of Victor Allens French Roast that I purchased in bulk after my opinion and good looks failed to score so much as a wiff of the BRC blend.

The amount of data collection needed to be statistically significant always depends on the desired end state. In other words what is the goal of compiling and analyzing these statistics? Ideally the larger the sample and the fewer the variables, the more accurate your results will be. Right now we are being forced to draw broad conclusions from a very ill defined data set. I think we already have significant statistical data to show that COVID-19 "statistically" concentrates itself in the demographic known as "sick old people"
Everything else is little more than a Semi-scientific Wild-Assed Guess.

…given that the testing currently being done is generally not random, is this useless for drawing reliable conclusions?
Not only is the current data collection pretty much the OPPOSITE of random, the folks collecting the data are in a constant state of moving the goal posts. This type of data collection as part of an epidemiologic study is about as “effective as trying to solve an algebra equation by chewing bubble gum.” If I have a set of dice, I can roll them and expect a generally random outcome based on each die having six sides with unique numbers. I can draw reliable conclusions by repeating the experiment a set number of times and recording the results. If one of these dice is “loaded” my testing is no longer random and my conclusions are not reliable.

Coronavirus testing is being done with loaded dice. There is no random testing. People that are not sick, have no symptoms, and have no direct exposure to a known COVID-19 patient have no reason to be tested. Conflating any results with the broader cross section of society is wildly inaccurate. Those who would present those results as factual are not only being intellectually dishonest, the fact that they are presenting their findings in an environment that directly impacts the very fabric of our society represents some of the most unethical professional conduct that I can imagine.
You might as well let Bernie Madoff explain the statistical analysis before Reverend Fauci preaches about it on CNN.


Just my two cents for now...............

Finest Kind once again! Excellent treatise and explains why I HATE the politicization of Science or anything else that dribbles out of he mouths of the 2 Bills for that matter(Gates and Nye).

[rsdengler]

Originally Posted by Box

Just my two cents - but "we the people" can absitivley posolutely get the dirt out of the carpet - "we the people" are all just too damn lazy to get the vacuum cleaner out of the closet.

I wish more of us would use that vacuum cleaner once in awhile. They are truly despicable people we have in office. And "we the people" need to get off our damn asses and burnout our vacuums...