COVID-19 numbers

[CrimsonNBlue]

I've also heard the opposite. In fact, Abilene TX got a spike in numbers to where they were 4th in the country in per capita cases. Then they started changing the methods by which they count to immediately fall back out because they didn't want the bad publicity.

I gotta think there's more pressure to underreport than over report. But it may depend on location.

The numbers of people dying at home has increased. Gotta think some of them are covid, and I don't think they're being included.

The numbers won't be exact.

Ya. That makes sense.

I'm not too hung up on the "numbers". 20 people have now died from an assisted living facility about 10mins from my house, with somewhere around 100 confirmed positives... so those are all the numbers I need to see to know its real and dangerous.

An assisted living place near Wichita had 49 of 50 test positive. 8 died. That’s all the headline said. You had to read pretty deep in the story to find that the other 41 fully recovered or were asymptomatic. Not nearly as apocalyptic as the headline would suggest. And that’s by design, unfortunately.

If 49 people test positive and of those people, 8 of them die, a person with half a brain doesn't need it explained to them that 41 of those 49 are recovered. Of course, your mileage may vary.

[HouseDivided]

Ya. That makes sense.

I'm not too hung up on the "numbers". 20 people have now died from an assisted living facility about 10mins from my house, with somewhere around 100 confirmed positives... so those are all the numbers I need to see to know its real and dangerous.

An assisted living place near Wichita had 49 of 50 test positive. 8 died. That’s all the headline said. You had to read pretty deep in the story to find that the other 41 fully recovered or were asymptomatic. Not nearly as apocalyptic as the headline would suggest. And that’s by design, unfortunately.

If 49 people test positive and of those people, 8 of them die, a person with half a brain doesn't need it explained to them that 41 of those 49 are recovered. Of course, your mileage may vary.

You know very well that the average person looks at the headline and assumes that the other 41 are at death’s door or otherwise suffering. They aren’t going to thin or read further. They are just going to remain scared and compliant, just as intended.

[Deleted User 62]

An assisted living place near Wichita had 49 of 50 test positive. 8 died. That’s all the headline said. You had to read pretty deep in the story to find that the other 41 fully recovered or were asymptomatic. Not nearly as apocalyptic as the headline would suggest. And that’s by design, unfortunately.

If 49 people test positive and of those people, 8 of them die, a person with half a brain doesn't need it explained to them that 41 of those 49 are recovered. Of course, your mileage may vary.

You know very well that the average person looks at the headline and assumes that the other 41 are at death’s door or otherwise suffering. They aren’t going to thin or read further. They are just going to remain scared and compliant, just as intended.

"Average person".
Fucking classic

[CrimsonNBlue]

An assisted living place near Wichita had 49 of 50 test positive. 8 died. That’s all the headline said. You had to read pretty deep in the story to find that the other 41 fully recovered or were asymptomatic. Not nearly as apocalyptic as the headline would suggest. And that’s by design, unfortunately.

If 49 people test positive and of those people, 8 of them die, a person with half a brain doesn't need it explained to them that 41 of those 49 are recovered. Of course, your mileage may vary.

You know very well that the average person looks at the headline and assumes that the other 41 are at death’s door or otherwise suffering. They aren’t going to thin or read further. They are just going to remain scared and compliant, just as intended.

It's been awhile since I've had the pleasure, but I would like to think dying rags like Wichita Eagle, Hutch News, McPherson Sentinel etc. are still writing at a level where they assume their readers can solve the first grade conundrum of 49 minus 8.

[ousdahl]

as for me, I assumed the other 49 minus 8 people who tested positive must all be feeling peachy keen about it!

but then again, I'm no average person.

[CrimsonNBlue]

Right, you know you're in a great spot when you have to argue that, out of 50 people in a single facility, 49 contracting a virus and 8 of them dying is nothing more than a benign head cold. Goddamn media, everything is great!

[ousdahl]

not nearly as apocalyptic as the headline would suggest, considering that 1 person out of 50 didn't even test positive!

[DCHawk1]

OK. So...I'll be Gutter today and play Devil's Advocate.

As you may know -- or are likely to hear, cuz politics! -- there are studies which show what we might assume is obvious: that the unemployment rate is directly connected to (causatively so) the pre-mature death rate. The most famous number -- from the book Corporate Flight: The Causes and Consequences of Economic Dislocation by Barry Bluestone, Bennett Harrison and Lawrence Baker -- is an increase of 37,000 premature deaths fore every 1 percent rise in unemployment.

Wade Thomas, an economics professor at SUNY Oneonta quoted the study in his 2005 book as follows:

According to one study a 1 percent increase in the unemployment rate will be associated with 37,000 deaths [including 20,000 heart attacks], 920 suicides, 650 homicides, 4,000 state mental hospital admissions and 3,300 state prison admissions.

Obviously, 1982 is a long time ago, and much has changed. Nevertheless, it's probably a safe bet that rising unemployment is still linked to increased pre-mature mortality.

John Crudele has written about this (https://nypost.com/2020/04/20/explainin ... ronavirus/) suggesting that we might escape the direst effects of a 10% climb in unemployment because most of the layoffs are supposed to be temporary.

Still, is there a point at which we acknowledge that lockdowns have costs as well as benefits?

[HouseDivided]

as for me, I assumed the other 49 minus 8 people who tested positive must all be feeling peachy keen about it!

but then again, I'm no average person.

Ok, I’ll play along. So, given the fact that 98% of those who test positive are either asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic, how do we know which category the other 41 fall into, since we are all so dumb?

[CrimsonNBlue]

Still, is there a point at which we acknowledge that lockdowns have costs as well as benefits?

I can only speak for myself, but of course there is some point that we have to accept some level of risk of infection.

[ousdahl]

yeah, it'll be some trade-off.

has anyone researching any correlation more specific to unemployment and the pandemic?

and again, I think this would be a lot less of an issue if, when we went into lockdown 2 months ago now, we had any plan at all after that.

[ousdahl]

as for me, I assumed the other 49 minus 8 people who tested positive must all be feeling peachy keen about it!

but then again, I'm no average person.

Ok, I’ll play along. So, given the fact that 98% of those who test positive are either asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic, how do we know which category the other 41 fall into, since we are all so dumb?

where'd that 98% come from?

heck, where'd any of these number come from? Like for real, do you happen to have a link to the original article, please?

[Deleted User 310]

Still, is there a point at which we acknowledge that lockdowns have costs as well as benefits?

I can only speak for myself, but of course there is some point that we have to accept some level of risk of infection.

That is how I feel as well.

And that point is likely very different for each individual.

Me personally, I'm nowhere near there (taking additional risk). But I'm lucky in that I can work from home (with barely any changes to my daily job) and financially support my family (barely) without my wife working....and she can stay home with the kids while they don't have school....i am well aware that's not a reality for many people. Some people are out of money and wondering how they're going to feed their children/themselves. I hope they're the ones receiving the most stimulus support. Not corporate bailouts for big business that pissed their reserves (that they should have) away in various ways.

[HouseDivided]

as for me, I assumed the other 49 minus 8 people who tested positive must all be feeling peachy keen about it!

but then again, I'm no average person.

Ok, I’ll play along. So, given the fact that 98% of those who test positive are either asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic, how do we know which category the other 41 fall into, since we are all so dumb?

where'd that 98% come from?

heck, where'd any of these number come from? Like for real, do you happen to have a link to the original article, please?

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

[Geezer]

0.0711 either dead or in serious/critical condition

[Deleted User 310]

0.0711 either dead or in serious/critical condition

All the % are skewed. They're not testing enough people to truly know how many people have had it/have it. If its 10x more then those %s look alot less scary (but still scary).

[HouseDivided]

0.0711 either dead or in serious/critical condition

98% of all resolved cases either minor or asymptomatic. Assuming those 41 recovered nursing home patients are considered “resolved,” they would most likely be in that 98%.

[Geezer]

The chart does not show 98% being a bad cold.
What purpose are you trying to accomplish?

CLOSED CASES
336,391
Cases which had an outcome:
255,654 (76%)
Recovered / Discharged

80,737 (24%)
Deaths

[Deleted User 62]

The chart does not show 98% being a bad cold.
What purpose are you trying to accomplish?

CLOSED CASES
336,391
Cases which had an outcome:
255,654 (76%)
Recovered / Discharged

80,737 (24%)
Deaths

Fuck em Geez. They were within 5-10 years of dying on their own.

Am I doing this right Psych?

[Sparko]

Then there are the other folks who seem to recover and die of stroke. And the inflammatory disease in children which killed three this weekend. The issue with this disease is that it is not safe to assume anything. There is probably a statistical correlation between a doomsday virus and rampant population growth, pollution, generalized attacks on science and intellectuals, habitat depletion and climate change. 1/.99999—pretty damned likely dinosaur-level hubris.