Evidence over hysteria — COVID-19

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

https://medium.com/six-four-six-nine/evidence-over-hysteria-covid-19-1b767def5894

[Dashinka 23,238]

Very good read with a lot of data.  This is what needs to be done with this virus.

[90DayFinancier 910]

"I’m quite experienced at understanding virality, how things grow, and data. In my vocation, I’m most known for popularizing the “growth hacking movement” in Silicon Valley that specializes in driving rapid and viral adoption of technology products. Data is data. Our focus here isn’t treatments but numbers. You don’t need a special degree to understand what the data says and doesn’t say. Numbers are universal"

 

In other words, there is no reason to his analysis over the experts. 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

16 minutes ago, 90DayFinancier said:

"I’m quite experienced at understanding virality, how things grow, and data. In my vocation, I’m most known for popularizing the “growth hacking movement” in Silicon Valley that specializes in driving rapid and viral adoption of technology products. Data is data. Our focus here isn’t treatments but numbers. You don’t need a special degree to understand what the data says and doesn’t say. Numbers are universal"

 

In other words, there is no reason to his analysis over the experts. 

 

  Even less probably. Just looking at the numbers does not really give a clear view of the big picture. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

33 minutes ago, 90DayFinancier said:

"I’m quite experienced at understanding virality, how things grow, and data. In my vocation, I’m most known for popularizing the “growth hacking movement” in Silicon Valley that specializes in driving rapid and viral adoption of technology products. Data is data. Our focus here isn’t treatments but numbers. You don’t need a special degree to understand what the data says and doesn’t say. Numbers are universal"

 

In other words, there is no reason to his analysis over the experts. 

I get that you are 110% invested in what the MSM is telling you.  At this point, it's far too early to tell how this will pan out.  Let's see what we see in a month or two, eh?

 

Experts say that WA state should have had 600,000 cases of covid last week.  Instead, there are 1,793.  How could the experts be so wrong?

Edited March 21, 2020 by Voice of Reason

[yuna628 9,528]

I can't stress this enough: if you do not test you do not find cases. 1,793 means a hill of beans. That only means the number that you have confirmed and know of. The number of those infected is far far greater. Current advisory in some states is only test those that end up in the hospital gasping for air already on their way out, and others are testing only those under the order of a doctor. So you're missing thousands upon thousands of persons infected that are asymptomatic, or those that stay in their homes thinking it's just a 'mild illness' or even those that have the more rarer symptoms that think they have a stomach bug. You're missing those that are sick and don't have insurance and aren't seeking care. And those that have been turned away and told they aren't sick enough. You're missing cases where doctors believe they do have it, but have no test to offer.

 

There are, I think at last count 195 official cases in this state, but I can tell you our hospitals are beginning to get overrun. There are way more critically ill patients showing up and we still don't have the ability to test them.

 

Labcorp, for instance says they can run about 10,000 tests per week by this past Friday. That does not mean all 10,000 of those cases will be positive or negative, but it will also include 'recovery' or even 'pre-recovery' cases, that must have at least 2 repeat tests come back negative before they can be considered cured. The one gentleman I followed from the ship took over 30+ days to finally get 2 tests come back clean. Those tests were run on him every day and take many days for any results to get back (by which time you could be dead). It also can take a couple of weeks for symptoms to show up, so cases we see officially logged, were infected some time ago, and that number will continue to explode every single day.

 

So you want to see 600,000 infected by now? Sure thing. Go get the tests. Because they exist. They're walking around infecting others or hopefully staying inside their homes. Every person that we don't know is infected has the potential to infect and kill about two or three others.

Edited March 21, 2020 by yuna628

[Dashinka 23,238]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Even less probably. Just looking at the numbers does not really give a clear view of the big picture. 

Looking at the numbers is how we learn more about this virus.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

2 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Looking at the numbers is how we learn more about this virus.

 

   Looking at patients who are going to die is another way we learn, unfortunately.

 

[Dashinka 23,238]

4 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Looking at patients who are going to die is another way we learn, unfortunately.

 

I don’t disagree, that has to be looked at as well.  Everything we can learn about this virus is important.

[arken 4,197]

1 hour ago, Voice of Reason said:

I get that you are 110% invested in what the MSM is telling you.  At this point, it's far too early to tell how this will pan out.  Let's see what we see in a month or two, eh?

 

Experts say that WA state should have had 600,000 cases of covid last week.  Instead, there are 1,793.  How could the experts be so wrong?

The US president said it would go down from at the time 15 cases to 0 or simply disappear. How can the president who claims he foresaw this pandemic even before experts saw it coming be so wrong? The MSM derangement kicking in?

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 minute ago, Dashinka said:

I don’t disagree, that has to be looked at as well.  Everything we can learn about this virus is important.

 

     Indeed. It's not a given that the mortality rate will be <1% or that it will end up at >7%. We have seen countries vary somewhere between those ranges. The numbers change based on what we do and how we respond and react. If we end up with lower mortality rates than expected, it means we did some things right at least. It doesn't mean we can stop what we are doing because mortality rates are lower. It means they are lower because of the things we are doing. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, yuna628 said:

I can't stress this enough: if you do not test you do not find cases. 1,793 means a hill of beans. That only means the number that you have confirmed and know of. The number of those infected is far far greater. Current advisory in some states is only test those that end up in the hospital gasping for air already on their way out, and others are testing only those under the order of a doctor. So you're missing thousands upon thousands of persons infected that are asymptomatic, or those that stay in their homes thinking it's just a 'mild illness' or even those that have the more rarer symptoms that think they have a stomach bug. You're missing those that are sick and don't have insurance and aren't seeking care. And those that have been turned away and told they aren't sick enough. You're missing cases where doctors believe they do have it, but have no test to offer.

 

There are, I think at last count 195 official cases in this state, but I can tell you our hospitals are beginning to get overrun. There are way more critically ill patients showing up and we still don't have the ability to test them.

 

Labcorp, for instance says they can run about 10,000 tests per week by this past Friday. That does not mean all 10,000 of those cases will be positive or negative, but it will also include 'recovery' or even 'pre-recovery' cases, that must have at least 2 repeat tests come back negative before they can be considered cured. The one gentleman I followed from the ship took over 30+ days to finally get 2 tests come back clean. Those tests were run on him every day and take many days for any results to get back (by which time you could be dead). It also can take a couple of weeks for symptoms to show up, so cases we see officially logged, were infected some time ago, and that number will continue to explode every single day.

 

So you want to see 600,000 infected by now? Sure thing. Go get the tests. Because they exist. They're walking around infecting others or hopefully staying inside their homes. Every person that we don't know is infected has the potential to infect and kill about two or three others.

Right.  And we're still here talking about it.  It's a new disease designed to wipe out humans, and we will figure it out, like we have for over 100 years.  Nature has a way of thinning the herd.  All this disease is doing is reducing the timeline til some of us die.  Which we ALL will, eventually.  We just have to figure out how to beat this particular bug so we can beat it.  Until the next one comes along.

 

We only know about the ones tested.  And in that unknown number, some will have been the flu, and lived.  Or the flu, and died.  Or covid and lived, or covid, and died.  Or pneumonia and died.  Globally, there will be MUCH uncertainty with the numbers, even a year from now.

 

BUT WE, AS A RACE, WILL OVERCOME.  Believe me.

[yuna628 9,528]

10 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

     Indeed. It's not a given that the mortality rate will be <1% or that it will end up at >7%. We have seen countries vary somewhere between those ranges. The numbers change based on what we do and how we respond and react. If we end up with lower mortality rates than expected, it means we did some things right at least. It doesn't mean we can stop what we are doing because mortality rates are lower. It means they are lower because of the things we are doing. 

Just a couple questions.. running through my head atm.

 

It was announced that a CA congressperson was hospitalized with pneumonia after he had some kind of falling accident. Supposedly they tested him and he was COVID negative. He went from serious to critical condition while in the hospital and doesn't sound like he will make it. Is it possible to get a false negative?

 

I remember a couple weeks back a therapist on twitter that was very concerned she had been exposed to a few patients that were infected (one died). She too had pneumonia and struggled to get a test done or any results after that. Eventually they told her she was negative. Her thinking was that they waited too long to test her and that perhaps this could produce a false negative?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

3 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Just a couple questions.. running through my head atm.

 

It was announced that a CA congressperson was hospitalized with pneumonia after he had some kind of falling accident. Supposedly they tested him and he was COVID negative. He went from serious to critical condition while in the hospital and doesn't sound like he will make it. Is it possible to get a false negative?

 

I remember a couple weeks back a therapist on twitter that was very concerned she had been exposed to a few patients that were infected (one died). She too had pneumonia and struggled to get a test done or any results after that. Eventually they told her she was negative. Her thinking was that they waited too long to test her and that perhaps this could produce a false negative?

I know you were asking SB, and I am sure he knows better, but I think at this point, ANYTHING is possible.  Die from pneumonia, and you might be counted as a covid patient.  Survive covid, and you might be counted as a flu patient.  Or not counted at all, because no one except you knew you were sick.

 

False positives certainly exist.  It can take up to two or three tests, from what I have read, to be certain.

 

In your friend's case... having pneumomonia and being in a hospital is a recipe for disaster, IMO.  People often get sick, or more sick, in hospitals.  They are places of many germs.  When I got double pneumonia a few years back, as soon as I was diagnosed, I went home to recover because I knew my chances were better there than in any hospital in the world (at least until a ventilator became necessary, which it thankfully never did).

[yuna628 9,528]

6 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

Right.  And we're still here talking about it.  It's a new disease designed to wipe out humans, and we will figure it out, like we have for over 100 years.  Nature has a way of thinning the herd.  All this disease is doing is reducing the timeline til some of us die.  Which we ALL will, eventually.  We just have to figure out how to beat this particular bug so we can beat it.  Until the next one comes along.

 

We only know about the ones tested.  And in that unknown number, some will have been the flu, and lived.  Or the flu, and died.  Or covid and lived, or covid, and died.  Or pneumonia and died.  Globally, there will be MUCH uncertainty with the numbers, even a year from now.

 

BUT WE, AS A RACE, WILL OVERCOME.  Believe me.

Cool man. I'll make sure to tell my parents that if they are unlucky enough to catch it....