Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) (SARS-CoV-2) [2020]

[Nesh]

And his data fuels my numbers. He added to the existing data, that 50x or more people have had the disease than have so far tested positive. Then do the maths on that...

Thats the math that calculates a significantly much much lower death rate.

Regarding the flu, there is the argument that it's spread may also be hugely under-reported, because it's seriousness is never considered critical.
We don't do massive tests for the flu, and it is hugely less likely to report flu as the cause of death. There are asymptomatic cases there as well. That alone skews flu numbers and Covid-19 numbers to opposite directions.
The original estimations where millions would get the covid-19 and die appears to be based on the original incomplete data estimates. This is why, with the new collection of data, in the massive soup of perspectives we have more scientists and physicians pointing that there is more concern than necessary.

The data we get from various countries, those that have the highest problems count numbers much differently from those that have the lowest.
UK and the US are current examples of higher death rates.

But here what it says in this article:
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200401-coronavirus-why-death-and-mortality-rates-differ

Even within a country, official statistics can vary according to what you count. In the UK, for example, the Department of Health and Social Care releases daily updates on how many people who tested positive for Covid-19 died that day. This includes any patient who tested positive for Covid-19 but who might have died from another condition (for example, terminal cancer). But the UK’s Office for National Statistics counts all deaths as Covid-19 where Covid-19 was mentioned on the death certificate, regardless of whether they were tested or if it was merely a suspected case of Covid-19. Adding to the complexity of trying to understand the death rates is that the two are out of sync, since the ONS way of counting can only happen after a death certificate has been issued, so takes longer.

"So if some countries only test patients ill enough to go to hospital – and don’t test the less-ill (or even asymptomatic) Covid-19 patients who don’t get to hospital (which is what the UK is currently doing) – the death rate can appear higher than in countries where testing is widespread (such as Germany or South Korea)."

"In the US, doctors have more discretion: they are asked to record whether the patient died “as a result of this illness” when reporting Covid-19 deaths to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It could be easy to see how a physician might believe that a Covid-19 patient who died of, say, a heart attack or brain aneurysm didn’t die as a result of Covid-19, and so wouldn’t report accordingly.

Importantly, though, while this might make a difference when the data is analysed months or years from now, this doesn’t translate into any difference in the death statistics at the moment. At present in the US, any death of a Covid-19 patient, no matter what the physician believes to be the direct cause, is counted for public reporting as a Covid-19 death.

“I expect that the final death certificate will have Covid along with pre-existing conditions, should there be any,” says Cécile Viboud, an epidemiologist at the Fogarty International Center at the National Institutes of Health. “But at this point, any Covid-positive case who dies will be tallied in the US death count.”

Especially the last part might probably explain what WE see (as consumers of publicly released info) and what physicians working at the hospitals see (see video above) or other scientists see show such a discrepancy.

Sweden may also fall in this category. Since there are no lockdowns, the spread is likely to be much more. So lets say the extreme example of 100% spread in the population. If they count deaths in a similar manner, every death (which of course we have every year) will be counted in the covid-19 deaths. To correct this we need also to see the yearly deaths to compare. If deaths are for example very similar, then covid-19 was not a major cause of death.

Checking the US death clock here: https://www.indexmundi.com/clocks/indicator/deaths/united-states
It says: Numbers on this page do not include deaths due to COVID-19. Our estimates are based on deaths reported before the pandemic started. Check our coronavirus section for information about daily and total deaths caused by the virus

If this is referring to the average numbers pre-covid (end of 2019) and the numbers of deaths in 2020 until now include them, (even for states like New York that has the highest problem), it doesnt show that the total deaths of the population so far was higher. Even if they are excluded we still can make some basic calculations (which may have significant or insignificant error). Current deaths are estimated at 10,000 and probable at 5,000 for New York.
According to the site this is how they count it, which repeats a possible inflated number as the cause:
Confirmed deaths: People who had a positive COVID-19 laboratory test.
Probable deaths: People who did not have a positive COVID-19 laboratory test, but their death certificate lists as the cause of death "COVID-19" or an equivalent.

Lets take the worst case scenario assumption where they are all covid-19 deaths and in the indexmundi these are not included in the 2020 deaths so far. We have for New York 52000 deaths until now and lets assume no Covid deaths in this number. With the worst case 15000 Covid deaths, we have 67000 total so far. Average death count per year is 165000. We are now at the end of the 4 month, so we have 2 more 4-month periods. Lets assume that measures are ineffective and we will continue to have 15000 Covid-19 deaths every 4 months. Multiplying these worst case scenarios we have 201,000 deaths vs 165000 average.

To reach that number I have to assume:

• No 2020 deaths in the indexmundi include the Covid-19 "confirmed"
• All suspected Covid-19 deaths are indeed Covid-19 deaths (includes probable Covid-19, people who died from Covid-19 complications, people who died from something else but were tested positive)
• The assumed casualties will remain the same throughout the year with no improvements

But if we assume that the 52000 deaths in indexmundi include all deaths including Covid-19 the number with simple subjective mathematics has a tendency to be similar to the average.

Of course to get a better picture we need historical/seasonal statistical data that compares the average pre-covid-19 with the present, because deaths might be either higher or less for each season and maybe the 52000 number is very high compared to the average of the same period.

But I couldnt find that data or a graph. Isolating just the hypothesized Covid-19 casualties that have different standards of measurement compared to other similar diseases and looking only at these numbers is awfully bad statistics.

 

[WhiningKhan]

Debating about correctness of reported causes of death seems a bit wasted effort to me. Total mortality has doubled in April in lots of places.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html

 

[BRiT]

Debating about correctness of reported causes of death seems a bit wasted effort to me. Total mortality has doubled in April in lots of places.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html

And that is without mass school shootings or murders happening in many of the places that would typically contribute to the death count. The news has a few of these stories, like how Miami hasn't had a murder in over 7 weeks since the 1957.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/24/miami-goes-7-weeks-without-homicide-for-first-time-since-1957/

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Thats the math that calculates a significantly much much lower death rate.

Yes, but even dramatically reduced, it's higher than flu. That maths again :

Serological testing suggests 50x as many people have had covid19.
Current positive tests worldwide is about 3 million.
If 50x as many people have actually had Covid19, that's 150 million.
Current death toll is 200,000.
That's 200,000 deaths from 150 million infected or 0.13% which sound flu like.

However, we then have the other side of this maths. 150 million is 1/50th of the world's population. If the virus were to reach all the people with 0.13% death rate, we get 10 million fatalities. that clearly way, way more than flu, which kills worst case 650,000 in estimates. Even when you start pushing the numbers as low as possible - let's call it 100x more people have been infected than tested, and let's say it only reaches half the world's population, you still end up with millions dying.

Regarding the flu, there is the argument that it's spread may also be hugely under-reported, because it's seriousness is never considered critical.

Yep. In which case, Covid19 is far worse, because with what appears the same case fatality, 0.13%, we have far, far more deaths in total from Covi19.

The original estimations where millions would get the covid-19 and die appears to be based on the original incomplete data estimates.

What's wrong with my maths above that points to millions dying?

Lets assume that measures are ineffective and we will continue to have 15000 Covid-19 deaths every 4 months.

But we have lockdowns in effect reducing death rates. If we didn't have lockdowns, the death rate would continue increasing exponentially. Here's the tracking from here with the obvious logarithmic projection from before lockdowns:



Cases in the US are at 1 million because lockdown happened. We don't have lockdowns for flu, so deaths from flu are when the virus is free to spread across everyone. If the lockdowns hadn't happened, we'd have 10x or even 100x more cases in the US then we have now, with 10x to 100x as many deaths from Covid19. The impact from the serological tests would be that case mortality wouldn't increase 10x to 100x. If we have 50 million cases in the US (50x as many as the 1 million recorded) then that's 1/6th of population. That'll lead to 6x more deaths than we have now, some 1.2+ million deaths, in the span of a couple of months if lockdowns hadn't happened.

That's a lot more than flu, although only 0.4% of the population.

 

[iroboto]

Once again...Typical seasonal Flu worldwide death rate is: 280,000 - 650,000/year
Covid-19 is just now reaching 200,000.
Current CDC estimates for 2019-2020 Flu season deaths in the US is 24,000 - 62,000.

Once again; that is an audit vs present on-going cases. the flu is also a mixture of over million or so strands not all of them dangerous and some particularly are. And we also Let the flu pass around unchecked. If COVID was as wide spread as the flu is today the numbers could be potentiall massive. COVID is only at 200K and we have instigated global lockdown to have this contained. COVID won’t go away just because the curve is flattened. It’s only been 4/5 months

 

[Nesh]

Yes, but even dramatically reduced, it's higher than flu. That maths again :

Serological testing suggests 50x as many people have had covid19.
Current positive tests worldwide is about 3 million.
If 50x as many people have actually had Covid19, that's 150 million.
Current death toll is 200,000.
That's 200,000 deaths from 150 million infected or 0.13% which sound flu like.

However, we then have the other side of this maths. 150 million is 1/50th of the world's population. If the virus were to reach all the people with 0.13% death rate, we get 10 million fatalities. that clearly way, way more than flu, which kills worst case 650,000 in estimates. Even when you start pushing the numbers as low as possible - let's call it 100x more people have been infected than tested, and let's say it only reaches half the world's population, you still end up with millions dying.

Yep. In which case, Covid19 is far worse, because with what appears the same case fatality, 0.13%, we have far, far more deaths in total from Covi19.

What's wrong with my maths above that points to millions dying?

But we have lockdowns in effect reducing death rates. If we didn't have lockdowns, the death rate would continue increasing exponentially. Here's the tracking from here with the obvious logarithmic projection from before lockdowns:

View attachment 3817

Cases in the US are at 1 million because lockdown happened. We don't have lockdowns for flu, so deaths from flu are when the virus is free to spread across everyone. If the lockdowns hadn't happened, we'd have 10x or even 100x more cases in the US then we have now, with 10x to 100x as many deaths from Covid19. The impact from the serological tests would be that case mortality wouldn't increase 10x to 100x. If we have 50 million cases in the US (50x as many as the 1 million recorded) then that's 1/6th of population. That'll lead to 6x more deaths than we have now, some 1.2+ million deaths, in the span of a couple of months if lockdowns hadn't happened.

That's a lot more than flu, although only 0.4% of the population.

I am not sure if your following what I said completely. I get the impression you just skimmed it

 

[BRiT]

Seems like CDC finally updates their list of symptoms, as we heard about these other symptoms long ago, so this story is making the rounds.

Coronavirus updates: CDC adds 6 new possible symptoms of COVID-19

People with COVID-19 have had a wide range of symptoms reported – ranging from mild symptoms to severe illness. These symptoms may appear 2-14 days after exposure to the virus:

• Fever
• Cough
• Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing
• Chills
• Repeated shaking with chills
• Muscle pain
• Headache
• Sore throat
• New loss of taste or smell​

It had previously only noted fever, cough and shortness of breath as possible symptoms of COVID-19.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/coronavirus-live-updates-cdc-adds-symptoms-covid-19/story?id=70351472

 

[iroboto]

Regarding the flu, there is the argument that it's spread may also be hugely under-reported, because it's seriousness is never considered critical.

Of course to get a better picture we need historical/seasonal statistical data that compares the average pre-covid-19 with the present, because deaths might be either higher or less for each season and maybe the 52000 number is very high compared to the average of the same period.

My 2 thoughts on this as someone who does this type of work (though I don't work on covid cases).
These are typical statical analysis that anyone worth there salt would do. Once again, we don't report present-current reporting the way we do auditing.
The Flu has a massive range of potential deaths caused by FLU because we did the math to figure out the minimum and maxima of the population based on the data we have. Enough smaples can paint both the best and worst case examples. We won't do this with COVID because
a) there's not enough data to do it
b) it's on-going

So all the questions you have are legitimate, but they aren't answered until significantly after all the data is out there, and they can build probable case scenarios from all the gathered symptoms ot make determinations of cause of death or if they were infected etc.
You are asking the right questions, but you are asking them at the wrong time. IE: we are in an emergency now, and you're trying to do an audit of something that is far from over. The decisions that need to be made, are not post-mortem decisions, they are _now_ decisions, and it's important to distinguish that. Hind sight is always 20/20. That's like playing a multiplayer game, dying, watching the replay and saying, oh of course you should have done that instead of this. Well, yea, that's what we should be doing, but we can't make those calls in real-time, proceeding with caution is painful, but it's a lot better than making dramatic mistakes that you can't recall from.

On your second point, once again, anyone worth their salt in stats doing that type of reporting would do this. The reported numbers for COVID should have that baked in if they are making are or aren't classifying those as COVID. As anyone doing stats work will know (and in this particular case), we are looking for divergent populations in statistical analysis and we have a boat load of tools to determine that. We can spot a shift in population from the norm and in doing so we can identify a subset that is highly likely to be 'out of band'. Don't need any fancy machine learning for that, these are basic statistical tools made way back. Creating some differentials will give an approximation to your answer.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but if you're trying to find the objective truth behind things, then you need to give leeway to a large range of possible answers, with the most likely answer being where the majority of worldwide specialists believe it is, and much less likely the answers that very few believe it is. It's not to say they can't be right. But if 90/100 worked it to be a certain way and 10 remaining outliers are divided between, it's _wayyyy worse_, and it's _wayyyy_ not serious at all: as a betting person you're going to put money down on the 90 people have worked out answers to the same thing.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Seems like CDC finally updates their list of symptoms, as we heard about these other symptoms long ago, so this story is making the rounds.

Coronavirus updates: CDC adds 6 new possible symptoms of COVID-19

People with COVID-19 have had a wide range of symptoms reported – ranging from mild symptoms to severe illness. These symptoms may appear 2-14 days after exposure to the virus:

• Fever
• Cough
• Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing
• Chills
• Repeated shaking with chills
• Muscle pain
• Headache
• Sore throat
• New loss of taste or smell​

It had previously only noted fever, cough and shortness of breath as possible symptoms of COVID-19.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/coronavirus-live-updates-cdc-adds-symptoms-covid-19/story?id=70351472

That list is missing Covid toes. Many people (especially younger) report something like hives on their toes.

 

[iroboto]

That list is missing Covid toes. Many people (especially younger) report something like hives on their toes.

Hoping to see more from an investigation in this area:
https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200424/blood-clots-are-another-dangerous-covid-19-mystery

really fascinating bodily response to covid here. I wish I knew more if it was normal for viruses or not.

Seems related here.

With his patient desperately ill, Poor suspected he had nothing to lose, so he punted.

“This is screaming blood clots. Why don’t we try tPA and see if it works?” he said.

He gave his patient a powerful clot-busting drug that’s normally used to treat strokes. It’s risky. If used improperly, it can cause uncontrolled bleeding, which can be deadly.

Within 30 minutes of getting the drug, his patient showed signs of improvement. Her carbon dioxide levels dropped, and other signs linked to shock seemed to improve. She lived for about another week, before ultimately dying. Poor has tried the drug on other COVID-19 patients, too. It hasn’t helped them survive, but he feels like it has shown him something about the disease.

You know you're in the deep end when doctors are improvising. But I guess on your death bed, you'll sign up for anything. Drug cocktail, malaria drug, clot busters, … disinfectants.

 

[BRiT]

Sadly, Ohio continues to only do around 4.4K tests a day.

Ohio's numbers today, Confirmed: 15963 (up from 15587 ), Hospitalized: 3178 (up from 3115 ), and Deaths: 728 (up from 711 ).
CDC Expanded Cases and Deaths: 603 (down from 604 ), 41 (up from 40 )
Confirmed Cuyahoga County: 1902 (up from 1867).

Percentage increase: 2.41%, 2.02%, 2.39%
Raw increase: 376, 63, 17

Ohio has total tests of 115,783 (up from 111,379) and tests per 1M population of 9946 (up from 9567 ) taken from https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/covid-19/dashboards/key-metrics/cases and https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ [case numbers updated later]

They're using roughly 11.641482 million as the population of Ohio.

 

[A1xLLcqAgt0qc2RyMz0y]

2019 Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19) for Dallas County Texas
https://www.dallascounty.org/departments/dchhs/2019-novel-coronavirus.php

April 26, 2020 - 3,014 confirmed cases - 82 deaths

3,014 confirmed cases up 105 over yesterday and one new death
those 105 new cases represent a 3.6% increase over the last day

Increases (by percent) over the last 31 days:
21.0%, 19.6%, 11.1%, 12.5%, 14.9%, 15.8%, 13.7%,
10.8%, 10.2%, 9.6%, 3.9%, 9.2%, 5.0%, 8.2%,
7.3%, 7.0%, 4.8%, 3.8%, 5.0%, 5.8%, 4.0%,
6.0%, 6.1%, 4.5%, 3.5%, 3.6%, 3.1%, 3.0%,
2.6%, 2.6% and now 3.6%

Increases (by count) over the last 31 days:
+64, +72, +49, +61, +82, +100, +100,
+90, +94, +97, +43, +106, +63, +108,
+105, +107, +79, +65, +89, +109, +80,
+124, +134, +104, +84, +90, +81, +80,
+71, +75 and now +105

As of 11:00am April 26, 2020, Dallas County Health and Human Services is reporting 105 additional positive cases of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), bringing the total case count in Dallas County to 3,014, including 82 deaths. The additional death being reported today is of a man in his 50's who was a resident of the City of Dallas and had been found deceased in his home.

Of cases requiring hospitalization, most have been either over 60 years of age or have had at least one known high-risk chronic health condition. Diabetes has been an underlying high-risk health condition reported in about a third of all hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Of the 81 total deaths reported to date, about 40% have been associated with long-term care facilities.

 

[A1xLLcqAgt0qc2RyMz0y]

State of Texas complete COVID-19 data breakdown

https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/ed483ecd702b4298ab01e8b9cafc8b83

Data as of 4/26/2020 @ 11:40 AM:

Total Tests: 276,021 (Up +13,205)
Cases Reported: 24,631 (Up +858)
In Hospitals: 1,542 (Down -55)
Patients Recovered (Estimated*) : 10,763 (Up +777)
Fatalities: 648 (Up +25)

Texas tests per 1M population are 9,898 (Up +473) which places Texas as the 4th worst State. Texas is down one place from yesterday. Ohio is one place better at 9,945 (Up +378) per 1M population.

Click this link: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us
and on the page click the Tests / 1M pop column to sort from worst to first

They're using roughly 27.885 million as the population of Texas.

 

[Daozang]

it is very peculiar that an "expert" physician or scientist or whatever will risk his credibility by showing the completely opposite picture that may put millions in danger

Come on man... Doesn't that apply to the other side as well?
Aren't the economic ramifications of this whole ordeal enough for someone to think twice about risking his credibility and put millions in harms way?
Look, iroboto said it best.
We don't have enough data and our reactions are on the cautious side.
And I tend to agree, in this case, it's far more likely that the majority of the experts are correct, than the minority.
Otherwise, I have to put on my tinfoil hat, and explain how the vast majority of experts on the planet are either complete imbeciles, or are lying for some nefarious purpose that most likely has to do with aliens, and the deep (global) state.
Or Jews, Jews are always a good candidate for things that involve tinfoil hats.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Or Jews, Jews are always a good candidate for things that involve tinfoil hats.

Flaming Jesus Christ on a pogostick! Show a bit of religious awareness would ya, they call them "yamikas" not "hats".

 

[Cyan]

Sadly, Ohio continues to only do around 4.4K tests a day.

Ohio's numbers today, Confirmed: 15963 (up from 15587 ), Hospitalized: 3178 (up from 3115 ), and Deaths: 728 (up from 711 ).
CDC Expanded Cases and Deaths: 603 (down from 604 ), 41 (up from 40 )
Confirmed Cuyahoga County: 1902 (up from 1867).

Percentage increase: 2.41%, 2.02%, 2.39%
Raw increase: 376, 63, 17

Ohio has total tests of 115,783 (up from 111,379) and tests per 1M population of 9946 (up from 9567 ) taken from https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/covid-19/dashboards/key-metrics/cases and https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ [case numbers updated later]

They're using roughly 11.641482 million as the population of Ohio.

how are the tests performed? This is the only one I've seen, also the typical PCRs.

 

[BRiT]

how are the tests performed? This is the only one I've seen, also the typical PCRs.

Once again, the tests used now are all the same. They have issues with shortage of swabs and the liquid to put the sample in.

One of the layers to the challenge of scaling up testing is a shortage of both the swabs to collect samples and the sterile solution needed to transport the swabs for testing.​

“Health systems worldwide have struggled because of the critical shortage of test kit components,” Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine said.
​

https://twitter.com/x/status/1251926844817002497

 

[Shifty Geezer]

And I tend to agree, in this case, it's far more likely that the majority of the experts are correct, than the minority.
Otherwise, I have to put on my tinfoil hat, and explain how the vast majority of experts on the planet are either complete imbeciles, or are lying for some nefarious purpose that most likely has to do with aliens, and the deep (global) state.

Historically, it's not uncommon for the experts/majority of the world to be wrong. Edward Jenner proposed inoculation against smallpox and was ridiculed. Ignaz Semmelweis proposed sanitation to save lives and was ridiculed by his peers. Jonas Hanway had the sense to use an umbrella to stay dry rather than keep the sun off, and was ridiculed, and it wasn't until 30 years later that it became acceptable.

Ideas tends to have a sort of gravity and pull people towards them, causing cultures to shift from one set of ideals to another. The majority sharing the same set of beliefs isn't particularly indicative of it being right. I think instead, people learn how the world is and then see how the world is through that filter which makes it harder to accept alternatives, whether what they know is based on religion or some scientific understanding. As a result, you'll get a large body of intellectuals and experts seeing the world a certain way and processing that data to fit those prejudices; good ol' confirmation bias.

In this case, the experts have loads of knowledge on how diseases work based on prior understanding. However, that understanding could be wrong because we've never investigated a disease like this before, and we have no idea what's new and different and what else is old and normal. We also aren't collecting data in a scientific method, and we have no controls. With no basis for comparison, theories are based on speculation and how one goes reading the evidence, filling in the blanks with postulations that makes the most sense to oneself, where one's own ideas will influence what one wants/expects to see in the evidence. That is, a person whose fundamental beliefs are to protect lives will see in the evidence a pattern that shows a deadly disease that must be stopped. Another person whose fundamental beliefs are that society will tend towards disorder and chaos without its active structures in place will see in that same evidence a pattern that shows a typical disease that doesn't need special treatment. Exactly the same psychological forces that cause fanboy warring about how the consoles compare when presented with the same evidence will be at play here in shaping how people interpret Covid19 from the same base evidence.

If you think about, the totality of humanity, petty much everyone has been wrong. Every theory held about matter and disease and the heavens going back 100,000 years has been wrong. It'd be incredibly arrogant to think that us now at this point in time have it all sussed and are right about everything, and there's nothing new to learn. As such, common sense and awareness of humanity's journey through time should have us be cautious of our own understanding and be willing to accept that we might end up in a text book as another example of the stupid beliefs people have held, with future generations laughing at what we thought we knew about diseases. That doesn't make the experts imbeciles; it would make them mistaken. And anyone with independent ideas isn't intrinsically a crackpot.

That's why the basis of all intelligent discussion should be the mantra of B3D, discuss the ideas, not the poster. Maintain an open mind and consider the logic and evidence of the arguments.

 

[pcchen]

Historically, it's not uncommon for the experts/majority of the world to be wrong. Edward Jenner proposed inoculation against smallpox and was ridiculed. Ignaz Semmelweis proposed sanitation to save lives and was ridiculed by his peers. Jonas Hanway had the sense to use an umbrella to stay dry rather than keep the sun off, and was ridiculed, and it wasn't until 30 years later that it became acceptable.

Just nitpicking: I think it's actually very uncommon for the experts/majority of the world to be wrong. For each example where it's the case, there are probably a hundred or even a thousand examples where the majority is right. I'd say 1:100 counts as very uncommon.
It makes a nice story when one person challenges the majority of the experts and wins, but most of the stories are actually more complex than it seems. For example, the theory of continental drift, when first proposed by Wegener, was ridiculed as science fiction, because he failed to propose a valid mechanism for how a large land mass could move. It's only got accepted into mainstream science after Holmes proposed a better mechanism for that (mantle convection), and that's about 40 years later.
So it's not that the people/experts who object the novel or extraordinary proposals/theories are just too conservative and refuse to accept new ideas. They tend to have valid objections and it falls on the people who propose the new ideas to provide better evidences to support their theories, and it's normal for them to not able to do that, even if they are right in the end. But that does not mean every "new ideas" are worth be taking seriously, as most of them are just very unlikely to be true.

 

[Nesh]

Come on man... Doesn't that apply to the other side as well?
Aren't the economic ramifications of this whole ordeal enough for someone to think twice about risking his credibility and put millions in harms way?
Look, iroboto said it best.
We don't have enough data and our reactions are on the cautious side.
And I tend to agree, in this case, it's far more likely that the majority of the experts are correct, than the minority.
Otherwise, I have to put on my tinfoil hat, and explain how the vast majority of experts on the planet are either complete imbeciles, or are lying for some nefarious purpose that most likely has to do with aliens, and the deep (global) state.
Or Jews, Jews are always a good candidate for things that involve tinfoil hats.

There is a lot of data now. Thats the purpose of the widespread testing. The issue isn't lack of data anymore. The issue is possible "contamination" of the data sets due to wrong definitions.
And come on, enough with this "conspiracy theory" and "tinfoil hats" whenever there is a mention of the other perspective. It doesnt have to do with nefarious plans or jews or aliens or interdimensional reptilians or the spaghetti monster.
The majority of "experts" don't know statistics or mathematical models and the real experts have clueless management on top of their heads that think they are better experts than those that know how to do proper research, and they (the management) are the ones that do the decision making. And there are even more problems and examples to mention that will take too much time and deserve their own thread. Some of them are hair pulling. This isn't something that is isolated to this particular event. It is a widespread problem that has been plaguing conducted research for decades. Politics and the media makes it even worse, by throwing in their own "statistics" for public consumption and by overshadowing a large number of experts that dont feed their own narrative. What we see currently may or may NOT be the culmination of this pre-existing phenomenon.