Page 14 of 25

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 1:11 am
by Sgt. Howard
Has anybody noticed that the recent CDC numbers indicate that the actual covid deaths in this country is 9K, not 170K? Just thought I'd ask... the big media isn't covering it very well... let me know if this stirs a memory for you...

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 1:56 am
by AnotherFairportfan
Sgt. Howard wrote: Mon Aug 31, 2020 1:11 am Has anybody noticed that the recent CDC numbers indicate that the actual covid deaths in this country is 9K, not 170K? Just thought I'd ask... the big media isn't covering it very well... let me know if this stirs a memory for you...
Actually, no i haven't - got a link?

Main hinky thing i've noticed about the CDC lately is that they changed their guidelines about asymptotic carriers to make it appear that sending the kids back to school is a Good Idea

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:25 am
by jwhouk
185,870 from here.

And considering that Arizona's death total from COVID just hit 5,000 on Saturday, I'd ask you to double check your sources.

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 8:46 am
by Typeminer
Here in Pennsylvania, reporting methods differ between counties and the Department of Health, but total deaths are north of 7700, and about 430 for the county where I live.

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 8:54 am
by Alkarii

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 5:42 pm
by AnotherFairportfan
Pretty much irrelevant - the real metric is excess mortality.

We have something like 200,000 "excess deaths" over what historically-based statistics say we should have had this year.

Image

Those people weren't killed by vampire squirrels - their deaths had a cause{s}, and the only variation from previous years over the timeframe in question was COVID-19

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 6:00 pm
by Warrl
and the only variation from previous years over the timeframe in question was COVID-19
Not quite - there's also the COVID-19-inspired lockdown, which apparently has caused a surge in suicides and opioid overdoses.

And traffic fatalities are a divided issue... they are down about 8%, which sounds great until one considers that miles driven are down about 18%.

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 10:58 pm
by Sgt. Howard
jwhouk wrote: Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:25 am 185,870 from here.

And considering that Arizona's death total from COVID just hit 5,000 on Saturday, I'd ask you to double check your sources.
From the CDC themselves- they essentially were ruling ANY death where COVID was present as a 'COVID DEATH', even when the cause of death was other than COVID.

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2020 12:15 am
by AnotherFairportfan
never mind.

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2020 8:16 am
by Atomic
More bad (poor quality) numbers in the mix?
Up to 90 per cent of people diagnosed with coronavirus may not be carrying enough of it to infect anyone else, study finds as experts say tests are too sensitive
Daily Mail article.

Yes, it's the Daily Mail, so divide by two and squint, but still....

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2020 9:00 am
by Typeminer
That Daily Mail article is hard to read through all the ads and popups, but the actual content is a deal more nuanced than the clickbait headlines.

The actual discussion is whether a PCR test is useful for determining whether a person is infectious at the time of testing. PCR absolutely determines whether a person has been exposed to the virus. Polymerase chain reaction works by replicating nucleotide sequences until there's enough material to be useful for analysis or whatever. If the virus is not there, you won't get a result. But if it is there, you can replicate it until you get the amounts needed.

So: PCR is the gold standard for determining exposure, but it doesn't particularly elucidate stage of infection. Same person may become infectious in a few weeks.

We need better coordination and distribution of testing materials, but that would require responsible leadership.

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2020 10:18 am
by Atomic
One thing that bothers me about the "Number of Cases" type reporting is the (lack of) definition for a "Case".

- Tested positive? (asymptomatic but part of the body count)
- Sick / exhibiting symptoms? (most likely definition)
- Hospitalized? (unduly restrictive count)

It's bad enough that graphs and numbers are being flung about liberally, but no analysis or interpretations are being offered.

"Highest Number Of Cases Reported Yet!" - Report released summarizing the past few months of test results = big one day number. Bleah.

The confusion continues...

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2020 11:34 am
by AnotherFairportfan


After Trump retweeted a QAnon falsehood about the CDC, COVID-19 and preexisting conditions, it became the party line.

Hours before the United States surpassed 6 million coronavirus cases and reached a death toll of 183,000, President Donald Trump and his defenders seized on an amateurish misreading of federal data to claim that the COVID-19 pandemic has killed hardly anyone at all.
"...but liars figure."

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2020 1:13 pm
by Dave
Atomic wrote: Tue Sep 01, 2020 10:18 am One thing that bothers me about the "Number of Cases" type reporting is the (lack of) definition for a "Case".
Agreed - it would be better if the published reports were specific. The CDC does have some recommendations, but they acknowledge that different states and counties are reporting based on their own locally-chosen criteria.
- Tested positive? (asymptomatic but part of the body count)
Historically, I believe this is probably the most common definition of a "case" for communicable diseases. The person in question is infected, may or may not be "sick" (symptomatic) and (depending on the disease) may be contagious.

By this standard, Typhoid Mary was a "case" of typhoid fever. She was never symptomatic (as far as we know) but she was contagious. She refused to accept that she was contagious because she felt fine, kept working as a cook, and was responsible for infecting a large number of others.
- Sick / exhibiting symptoms? (most likely definition)
The problem with this, is that it misses two categories of people who are infected (and often contagious): those who are pre-symptomatic (but will begin exhibiting symptoms in the next few days), and those who are asymptomatic and will remain so.
- Hospitalized? (unduly restrictive count)
The better reports distinguish these. The ones I've seen come out of my county (Santa Clara Co., in California) distinguish cases, hospitalizations, hospitalizations requiring intensive care (an ICU bed), and deaths.

It's bad enough that graphs and numbers are being flung about liberally, but no analysis or interpretations are being offered.
You often have to drill down past the "for quick public consumption" press reports, and look one level deeper into the actual data reported by the states and counties.

"Highest Number Of Cases Reported Yet!" - Report released summarizing the past few months of test results = big one day number. Bleah.
I'd agree with "bleah" if it's just a statistical fluctuation. If it's part of an increasing trend in the area in question, it's an "uh oh" rather than a "bleah".

As to what constitutes a "case" for reporting purposes, here's some information from the CDC's current guidelines document (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd/COVID ... -final.pdf). Emphasis-in-bold added by me.
1) COVID-19 Infections (Infections due to SARS-CoV-2)

a) Code only confirmed cases

Code only a confirmed diagnosis of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) as documented by the provider, documentation of a positive COVID-19 test result, or a presumptive positive COVID-19 test result. For a confirmed diagnosis, assign code U07.1, COVID-19. This is an exception to the hospital inpatient guideline Section II, H. In this context, “confirmation” does not require documentation of the type of test performed; the provider’s documentation that the individual has COVID-19 is sufficient.

Presumptive positive COVID-19 test results should be coded as confirmed. A presumptive positive test result means an individual has tested positive for the virus at a local or state level, but it has not yet been confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). CDC confirmation of local and state tests for COVID-19 is no longer required.

If the provider documents "suspected," "possible," "probable," or “inconclusive” COVID19, do not assign code U07.1. Assign a code(s) explaining the reason for encounter (such as fever) or Z20.828, Contact with and (suspected) exposure to other viral communicable diseases.
To sum that up - the CDC says to use the reporting code for COVID-19 if there's a positive test result, or if the provider (the doctor or hospital) declares a confirmed diagnosis of the disease. The latter can, i presume, be done on the basis of signs-and-symptoms and medical/social history, or by exclusion (that is, if they have cough and fever and pneumonia but test negative for flu and bacteria, and were in contact with a known COVID patient).

Considering that testing for COVID-19 is still quite spotty (shortage of materials and backlogs in the lab), it seems quite reasonable to me to accept a doctor's diagnosis of COVID-19 even in the absence of a formal test result. If you can't test a sick person because you don't have a test available, that doesn't somehow make the illness "not COVID". It'd be nice if it did, but that's sloppy "magical thinking" - don't test, and the "cases" go away. The real world doesn't work that way.

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2020 3:46 pm
by Atomic
Indeed. Consider the "Autism Epidemic." It arose because of establishing a formal medical definition for "Autsim," and then doctors now having a way to describe a collection of behaviors and conditions. Poof! It's Everywhere! Eeek!

I remember a TV show (Partridge Family?) where they go on tour and the Progressive Teenager proclaims, "Great! Now we can go looking for Social Injustice!" Ya, preen those self-absorbed feathers baby, and ignore the rest of the world. When all you've got is a hammer....

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2020 11:42 pm
by AnotherFairportfan
Even Fox’s ‘Hard News’ Shows Don’t Want to Book Trump’s Favorite New COVID Adviser

“It makes no sense to have him on,” a source said of Trump’s newly instated pandemic adviser who critics say lacks needed credibility and expertise

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:14 am
by AnotherFairportfan
CNN's Jake Tapper abruptly ended an interview with a Trump advisor who refuses repeatedly to give a straight answer to a simple question.
As Navarro continued to defend his remarks, Tapper pulled the plug on the interview and reminded viewers that the U.S. contains less than 5% of the world’s population but more than 20% of the world’s recorded coronavirus deaths.

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 12:16 pm
by Atomic
"recorded"

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:22 pm
by AnotherFairportfan
Yep. And close to that level of disparity with countries whose tracking standards i trust.

More than i do ours, actually.

Re: March 12, 2020 (aka COVID-19 thread)

Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2020 4:14 pm
by Dave
One bit of good news recently, was a study which suggests that giving COVID-19 patients a good solid dose of a specific Vitamin D metabolite may be quite helpful. Of those patients who were hospitalized, those given this Vitamin D metabolite were much less likely to need to be taken into Intensive Care.

The metabolite in question is calcifediol (25-hydroxycholecalciferol). This isn't drugstore / vitamin-supplement "Vitamin D" (vitamin D3 a.k.a cholecalciferol). It's what cholecalciferol is turned into by the liver, and part of the complex chain of Vitamin D metabolism.

As with the use of dexamethasone and other steroids, this isn't either a prevention or a cure, but does seem to be a helpful treatment which helps keep bad cases of COVID-19 from getting worse in many cases.