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

The Ioannidis videos posted in this thread are interesting. He comes across as very calm and reasoned guy and he obviously should have the science down to pat given his background but (there is always a but), in the first video posted back in March, every one of his assumptions about the disease were talking down the risk. He was quite right that we didn't (and still don't) have enough data, but it was obvious that his gut feeling was that it wasn't as serious as feared.

The new video references the Stanford study which makes very bold claims but we've already had a number of critiques of this work. Specifically, they are assuming that the specificity of their test is incredibly high and has very few false positives. They have also made some extrapolations from their data which don't match the population spread of the Santa Clara County where the work took place. Their selection criteria was problematic as well (asking for volunteers in Facebook!). This link has probably been posted earlier in this thread and provides what is pretty much a takedown of the statistical analysis of the study:

https://statmodeling.stat.columbia....-in-stanford-study-of-coronavirus-prevalence/

I can't help but feel that the study began with a belief that it was massively more widespread and has worked towards that conclusion.

Hopefully, similar studies can be carried out elsewhere with a solid statistical analysis available so we have some sort of a comparison to these Stanford figures. Perhaps ones which are more widespread with random sampling taking place.

 

I'm in no way saying that you subscribe to conspiracy theories, I just find it difficult for the layman (that includes certainly, me) to disregard the expert opinion of the majority of people that collaborate to reach an understanding of our situation, as well as the evidence reported by the vast majority of news outlets everywhere in the world, without ultimately resorting to one.
I just need hard evidence to be convinced that everyone is either dead wrong, lying, or a combination of both.

I cannot disagree with any of that.
And honestly, I certainly have no problems with Nesh as a poster.
But I don't think it applies here...
In my opinion, you have to pick your statistics and disregard a lot of evidence to match covid19 with the flu.

 

Okay, I'll adapt that line from "Historically, it's not uncommon for the experts/majority of the world to be wrong" to "Historically, it's sometimes happened that the experts/majority of the world have been wrong."

Although I used big-ticket examples, they aren't the limits of exceptions. Depending on what field you look at, there are plenty of small scale cases where would-be experts stick by their guns and refuse to listen to alternatives simply because it disagrees with their world view. And the history of medicine is rife with wrong thinking.

 

State of Texas complete COVID-19 data breakdown



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

Data as of 4/27/2020 @ 12:10 PM:

Total Tests: 290,517 (Up +14,496)
Cases Reported: 25,297 (Up +666)
In Hospitals: 1,563 (Up +21)
Patients Recovered (Estimated*) : 11,170 (Up +407)
Fatalities: 663 (Up +15)

Texas tests per 1M population are 10,418 (Up +520) which places Texas as the 6th worst State. Texas is up two places from yesterday. Ohio is one place worse at 10,255 (Up +310) 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.

 

But who are these huge amounts of experts vs the tiny amount of the exceptions? One thing you won't see happening in any science ever, is every expert to go through verification of every research paper or discovery.
Once something is established as an authority by one or a few "experts" it will be repeated by the rest of the experts with no verification. If the model has unnoticed errors and hence wrong results it will become the norm. And if it is the norm for too long it becomes a belief system and hard to abandon even after it has been proven false, because a whole lot of theories and careers have been developed on an established discovery which was a false "truth".
And that's the tip of the ice berg.

In the case of Covid-19 the doctors, nurses and ministers face something they have not seen before, it is not their job to do the research. They are waiting from a source which is considered an authority to spill it out for them. The sources of info could be very limited like for example guidelines and hasty (or not) research from WHO, and everyone will be absorbing that information, digesting it, and passing it over to the rest of the "experts" because thats the only information they have ready and feel they can trust, because it is the World Health Organization. These numbers can also be subject for misinterpretation by experts who may be the most brilliant doctors, surgeons but still know jack shit about statistics (just as super experts in medical statistics may know jack shit how to treat diarrhea). So what you have are a group of experts from different fields that have not done any verification or are in any position nor its their job to do it, having an opinion which is tracked back to very limited sources.

In the case of Ioannides, I ve known about him many years ago when I discovered his research. He is known for doing exactly this: Verifying the validity of research, discovering the weaknesses of how research is being conducted and suggesting solutions. What he found is that the majority of published research have significant errors and are unverifiable, even though they were supposedly reviewed, yet many are being cited and used as a basis for medical practice and farther research.

He probably made similar mistakes with his current research on Covid-19 and it is much worse than what he estimated, that's also possible of course. Who knows? But the information we have, and the way the information is defined and collected, even for someone who has some knowledge about how statistics is conducted, has a LOT of questions about the numbers, because they lack a lot of clarifications and mix different information (like for example counting every death with Covid-19 into the Covid-19 death count is a highly possible case for bias. Or are the hospitals isolating properly non-Covid-19 patients from the Covid-19 patients or are they contaminating them? etc).

We as laymen mostly consume raw numbers without context and the context is mostly defined by the media including who the media chooses to interpret the numbers for us.

We aren't objectively out in the fields with the experts who might be much much more.

 

The huge amount of experts are the ones from cities, states, countries and the WHO. The vast majority of which are saying this is much worse then the flu.

And you don't need a doctorate in epidemiology to count.

 

Statistics is not your elementary school mathematics where you were putting numbers on Y/X axis and drawing beautiful lines and colorful squares.

 

I actually remember making quite a few colourful charts in my post secondary statistics classes.

 

Here have a cookie

 

Ohio still wants to begin reopening first week of May. They're out of their minds trying to do anything with such pathetic testing efforts. They only did another 3.6K tests the last day.

Ohio's numbers today, Confirmed: 16325 (up from 15963), Hospitalized: 3232 (up from 3178 ), and Deaths: 753 (up from 728 ).
CDC Expanded Cases and Deaths: 626 (up from 603), 41 (same as before 41)
Confirmed Cuyahoga County: 1938 (up from 1902 ).

Percentage increase: 2.27%, 1.70%, 3.43%
Raw increase: 362, 54, 25

Ohio has total tests of 119,391 (up from 115,783 ) and tests per 1M population of 10,255 (up from 9946 ) 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.

 

Saskatchewan is opening on monday (a bit) but we are testing around 1% of the population every week and turning in 99%+ negative results

I'm still concerned because there are a lot of at risk populations that have avoided it but could be overwhelmed quickly and have limited resources. LTC, reserves and northern communities.

 

You can say that for anyone about anything...
Global warming, check.
Cigarettes vs lung cancer, check.
Annual death toll of the flu.., check.
Just fill in the blank, and write check next to it... Check
But then you have no basis to measure and compare, for anything.

Right now, the research is ongoing. Could it be that mistakes are being made?
Certainly.
But if the errors where of that magnitude, we would have to start questioning the reports of the doctors and the nurses, right down to the janitors of certain hospitals around the world.
I get being skeptical. I just am not seeing it here.

 

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

April 27, 2020 - 3,105 confirmed cases - 84 deaths

3,105 confirmed cases up 91 over yesterday and two new deaths
those 91 new cases represent a 3.0% increase over the last day

Increases (by percent) over the last 32 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%, 3.6% and now 3.0%

Increases (by count) over the last 32 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, +105 and now +91

 

Well I am actually pleasantly surprised in Texas's attempt to reopen the economy as it seems measured and staggered. That along with the very large amount of daily testing recently along with the number of active and new cases currently are on the low end compared to other states.

Over the last seven days Texas has really stepped up testing. Seven days ago (4/20) Texas has done only 190,394 tests as of today (4/27) they have done 290,517 tests or a gain of +100,123 tests which is an average of 14,303 tests per day for those seven days.

4/20 - Cases Reported: 19,458, In Hospitals: 1,411
4/27 - Cases Reported: 25,297, In Hospitals: 1,563

Cases Reported over the seven days: 5839, Average of 834 new cases daily.
In Hospitals numbers have ranged between 1400 and 1600 over the seven days.

It will be interesting to track these numbers going forward.

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

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/t...start-business-in-phases-governor/ar-BB13hCqY

 

Some data for hope: Spain is the european country where more people have recovered with 120.000 people recovered and yesterday was the day with the lowest recorded deaths with "only" 288 deaths.

didn't know you are from Saskatchewan, I dreamt of a place like that several years ago, but they say it's cooold.

 

The State of Ohio reopen information:

https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/po...o/responsible-protocols/responsible-protocols

5 PROTOCOLS FOR ALL BUSINESSES:

1. No mask, no work, no service, no exception. Require face coverings for employees and clients/customers at all times.
2. Conduct daily health assessments by employers and employees (self-evaluation) to determine if “fit for duty.”
3. Maintain good hygiene at all times – hand washing, sanitizing and social distancing.
4. Clean and sanitize workplaces throughout workday and at the close of business or between shifts.
5. Limit capacity to meet social distancing guidelines.
   1. Establish maximum capacity at 50% of fire code.
   2. And, use appointment setting where possible to limit congestion.

https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/po...ements/sector-specific-operating-requirements

Sector Specific Operating Requirements
General Office Environments

Employees & Guests
Mandatory

• Ensure minimum 6 ft between people, if not possible, install barriers
• Personnel should work from home when possible
• Employees must perform daily symptom assessment*
• Require employees to stay home if symptomatic
• Ensure minimum 6 ft between people, if not possible, install barriers
• Face coverings must be worn at all times while working
• Require regular handwashing
• Reduce sharing of work materials
• Limit travel as much as possible
• Stagger arrival of all employees and guests
• Post signage on health safety guidelines in common areas

Recommended Best Practices

• Ensure seating distance of 6 ft or more
• Enable natural workplace ventilation
• Ensure seating distance of 6 ft or more
• Health questionnaire for symptoms at entry
• Temperature taking protocol

Physical Spaces / Workstations
Mandatory

• Frequent disinfection of desks, workstations, and high-contact surfaces
• Daily disinfection of common areas
• Cancel/postpone in person events when social distancing guidelines cannot be met
• No buffet in cafeteria
• Utilize disposable tableware and other materials
• Establish maximum capacity (e.g. 50% of fire code)

Recommended Best Practices

• Redesign/space workstations for 6 ft or more distance
• Close cafeteria and gathering spaces if possible, or conduct regular cleanings
• Limit congregation in office spaces
• Redesign/space workstations for 6 ft or more of distance
• Divide essential staff into groups and establishing rotating shift
• Availability of at least 3 weeks of cleaning supplies

Confirmed Cases
Mandatory

• Immediately isolate and seek medical care for any individual who develops symptoms while at work
• Contact the Local Health District about suspected cases or exposures
• Shutdown shop/floor for deep sanitation if possible

Recommended Best Practices

• Work with Local Health Department to identify potentially infected or exposed individuals to help facilitate effective contact tracing/notifications
• Once testing is readily available, test all suspected infections or exposures
• Following testing, contact Local Health Department to initiate appropriate care and tracing

 

@Cyan @digitalwanderer COVID-19 and FLU Swab tests ...

 

the issue here is the people. Irresponsible people can be a problem, or people who want to infect others --seen that on teh TV, a guy in Korea inside a train, spitting and scattering his saliva in a train, also people from the gypsy ethnic group spitting on sits at the hospital so everyone got infected (this was in the Basque Country).

aaah, it's the same one that hospitals use here --initially I thought the test consisted in licking an spatula like device, but I was wrong. Those who want to get tested go by car there, and hospitals have the tests and some personal outside so people don't have to get out of the car, they perform that test, leave for home and get the results in about 2-3 hours. Of course, most of the people that perform those tests think they have symptoms.

 

Since you mention it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_controversy
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/01/the-rockefellers-vs-exxon.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17548665
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_&_Williamson#Controversy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_A._Kehoe

 

UK ONS death figures for the week to 17th April show almost 12,000 excess deaths in comparison to the 5 year average. Not all of these are registered as having Covid-19 as the direct cause on the death certificate. The numbers of deaths in care homes are taking off now as the numbers in hospitals drops. Bear in mind that we've had extremely mild weather this year so were running below that average before Covid-19 hit, so probably a bit higher than this overall. Running total excess deaths for the year is only around 22,000 but that of course incorporates the lower numbers from the first dozen or so weeks of the year. Up to 17th April, the actual total caused by the pandemic (including excess deaths from strain to the health system) is going to be well in excess of 30,000 so far. The final figure of 60,000 deaths predicted by the IMHE is probably in the right ballpark, I'd have thought. Not good at all in comparison to the majority of our peers.