I thought they were the same people screaming we need more tests! We need more tests! So we get more tests and there are tons of cases, but guess what? Many of the cases are pretty mild...
Case fatality rate.. measure of deaths over confirmed infections... Doomers panic pushing 10%+.. recent models put it more in line with a really bad flu pandemic under .3%
Who cares about "confirmed cases" if no one can agree what the tests are actually confirming, how effective the tests are, whether the individuals tested are exemplary of the total population, whether actually having the virus is any more dangerous than any other viral respiratory infection, or whether they're actually new cases or just newly tested individuals who've had the virus for a while now?
Bad data is worse than no data. Notice this headline just says "coronavirus cases", NOT SARS2-CoV-19 cases. Corona viruses are some of the most common seasonal cold causing viruses in the world. It takes very expensive and time consuming testing to determine whether you've been exposed to a specific strain of a virus, and you have to be tested multiple times over several days to determine if you have an ongoing infection or just past exposure.
ALSO, we've never even TRIED to track a specific viral strain's movement through a population via testing before. We have no historical data against which to compare all these new Big Scary Numbers. Is this number a lot? Is it spreading faster than previous outbreaks? We don't know. We have no way of knowing.
Compared to EU we have about 10% of their deaths. Close to 70% of their population. Half their total cases.
Our numbers are MUCH better than anywhere else comparable. We also have more people that have recovered from this (meaning now test negative for the virus) than have died. From what I've seen that's a new development. Have we turned the corner?
It wouldn't surprise me if this is as bad as it gets. Honestly, there's plenty of reason to believe the virus arrived in the USA much earlier than some are claiming. Considering the number of "carriers" (more accurately described as naturally immune individuals), and those that got mild common cold like symptoms and never went to a doctor, there's no way of knowing how many people caught it and never noticed before the first patients that were bad enough to go to a doctor and have their symptoms recognized as something unusual to warrant testing.
It's unreasonable to assume the worst cases were also the first cases. Coming in the middle of cold and flu season, I'm sure a significant number of people just assumed they had cold or flu and went on with their lives as normal. So there's a good chance most of these shelter in place orders came well after most people had already been exposed. If its anywhere near as contagious as the professional worst-case-scenario guessers claim, then it was probably spreading all over the country for months before anyone started making a big deal out of it.
It would be REALLY nice if this is as bad as it gets! Obviously that's what we're all hunkering down to try to accomplish. Our deaths per day keeps climbing, but of course at least 3 Governors are denying people life saving medication. We have enough to give to everyone who's confirmed infected and get them virus free in 6 days. That's the way to beat this thing.
It would be really interesting to see the data for US flu deaths this year prior to 2/1. Did they all die from pneumonia consistent with dying from Wuhan virus? How many of those had a flu shot? How many were given other flu treatments? If all these numbers line up with what we know of Wuhan virus, that supports your theory. Which would impact how we go back to work, and when.
The real relevant metric is all-cause mortality. Unfortunately it takes years to compile and release that data. Currently the most recently data from CDC is for 2017, it'll likely be 2023 at the earliest before we have an opportunity to look at the big picture and see just how much impact was really felt from the virus.
Of course, the real trick is that if the virus does kill far fewer than predicted, they'll just use that as evidence their extreme measures worked and we'll be expected to go through this every time a novel infectious virus is discovered - something that happens every few years.
But if you look at previous outbreaks such as the 2009 H1N1 outbreak, and compare the all-cause death rate to non-outbreak years, the difference is well within standard deviation.
2006: 8.282 deaths per 1000 people
2007: 8.203
2008: 8.124
2009: 8.131
2010: 8.138
2011: 8.145
So with almost no extreme measures, the 2009 H1N1 didn't even register in the all-cause mortality rate. The deaths due to the outbreak aren't necessarily "additional deaths", because they tend to most effect the individuals who likely would have died from a more mundane infection within the year.
There are far to many variables to point to any one action as having made a difference or not, but since the politicians and bureaucrats are free to compare reality to more frightening alternate realities rather than historical hard data, they can claim to have saved the world and no one can prove them wrong.
What a great post! I'm tempted to ask what line of work you're in.
Very strange the recent 1%-ish tick up in total deaths. Can't pinpoint when it started but seems it was probably well before last November? Seems this crisis will be completely washed out by this larger viewpoint.
That first link also makes you wonder what the UN is planning on doing to kill 2.5 more of us per 1000 by 2050, lol. Maybe they really don't want ALL of us dead? Just a substantial increase every year ...
This is so petty at a time of national unity. It's amazing how deranged the Left has become. Even in 2001 with Bush, a President liberals despised, Democrats rallied behind him.
I guess if it had been 2004 (election year) things would have been different.
How many of her idiots are going to realize we have the most confirmed because we're testing more than anyone else in the world?
If you guessed zero, you might be a deplorable.
We also have a large population, and an extremely trafficked public transit system in NYC.
Look at deaths per million population and we look nothing like many of these other countries.
Exactly.
I thought they were the same people screaming we need more tests! We need more tests! So we get more tests and there are tons of cases, but guess what? Many of the cases are pretty mild...
Ya I don't think that will play well ecen with the pieces of shit on her side if the aisle
It's because we're right over the target, all they have is divisiveness in a time of great unity.
... and leads in testing... And leads in recovery... And leads in lowest CFR.
Thanks for fanning the flames, useless side of beef
Lowest CFR?
Case fatality rate.. measure of deaths over confirmed infections... Doomers panic pushing 10%+.. recent models put it more in line with a really bad flu pandemic under .3%
Wow...
What an evil fucking cunt she is. I hope she lives to be 140 years old with everyone constantly reminding her that she is still not president.
I'm sure she will delete this tweet later on - luckily someone already archived it:
https://archive.is/rF5aR
We can use this at trial.
Salty non-president
Yeah, because China's numbers are totally legit... lol
Also, sorry, but I think Italy and the like being close to where we are is much worse, since they're like 1/5 or 1/6 the population that we are.
lol we arent even close. those stats are fake news
She probably tweeted that while stroking Bloomberg's mini head.
lol. This caught me off guard
Who cares about "confirmed cases" if no one can agree what the tests are actually confirming, how effective the tests are, whether the individuals tested are exemplary of the total population, whether actually having the virus is any more dangerous than any other viral respiratory infection, or whether they're actually new cases or just newly tested individuals who've had the virus for a while now?
Bad data is worse than no data. Notice this headline just says "coronavirus cases", NOT SARS2-CoV-19 cases. Corona viruses are some of the most common seasonal cold causing viruses in the world. It takes very expensive and time consuming testing to determine whether you've been exposed to a specific strain of a virus, and you have to be tested multiple times over several days to determine if you have an ongoing infection or just past exposure.
ALSO, we've never even TRIED to track a specific viral strain's movement through a population via testing before. We have no historical data against which to compare all these new Big Scary Numbers. Is this number a lot? Is it spreading faster than previous outbreaks? We don't know. We have no way of knowing.
Compared to EU we have about 10% of their deaths. Close to 70% of their population. Half their total cases.
Our numbers are MUCH better than anywhere else comparable. We also have more people that have recovered from this (meaning now test negative for the virus) than have died. From what I've seen that's a new development. Have we turned the corner?
It wouldn't surprise me if this is as bad as it gets. Honestly, there's plenty of reason to believe the virus arrived in the USA much earlier than some are claiming. Considering the number of "carriers" (more accurately described as naturally immune individuals), and those that got mild common cold like symptoms and never went to a doctor, there's no way of knowing how many people caught it and never noticed before the first patients that were bad enough to go to a doctor and have their symptoms recognized as something unusual to warrant testing.
It's unreasonable to assume the worst cases were also the first cases. Coming in the middle of cold and flu season, I'm sure a significant number of people just assumed they had cold or flu and went on with their lives as normal. So there's a good chance most of these shelter in place orders came well after most people had already been exposed. If its anywhere near as contagious as the professional worst-case-scenario guessers claim, then it was probably spreading all over the country for months before anyone started making a big deal out of it.
It would be REALLY nice if this is as bad as it gets! Obviously that's what we're all hunkering down to try to accomplish. Our deaths per day keeps climbing, but of course at least 3 Governors are denying people life saving medication. We have enough to give to everyone who's confirmed infected and get them virus free in 6 days. That's the way to beat this thing.
It would be really interesting to see the data for US flu deaths this year prior to 2/1. Did they all die from pneumonia consistent with dying from Wuhan virus? How many of those had a flu shot? How many were given other flu treatments? If all these numbers line up with what we know of Wuhan virus, that supports your theory. Which would impact how we go back to work, and when.
The real relevant metric is all-cause mortality. Unfortunately it takes years to compile and release that data. Currently the most recently data from CDC is for 2017, it'll likely be 2023 at the earliest before we have an opportunity to look at the big picture and see just how much impact was really felt from the virus.
Of course, the real trick is that if the virus does kill far fewer than predicted, they'll just use that as evidence their extreme measures worked and we'll be expected to go through this every time a novel infectious virus is discovered - something that happens every few years.
But if you look at previous outbreaks such as the 2009 H1N1 outbreak, and compare the all-cause death rate to non-outbreak years, the difference is well within standard deviation.
2006: 8.282 deaths per 1000 people 2007: 8.203 2008: 8.124 2009: 8.131 2010: 8.138 2011: 8.145
So with almost no extreme measures, the 2009 H1N1 didn't even register in the all-cause mortality rate. The deaths due to the outbreak aren't necessarily "additional deaths", because they tend to most effect the individuals who likely would have died from a more mundane infection within the year.
There are far to many variables to point to any one action as having made a difference or not, but since the politicians and bureaucrats are free to compare reality to more frightening alternate realities rather than historical hard data, they can claim to have saved the world and no one can prove them wrong.
Deathrate graphed by year: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/death-rate
Outbreaks by year: https://www.who.int/csr/don/archive/year/en/
What a great post! I'm tempted to ask what line of work you're in.
Very strange the recent 1%-ish tick up in total deaths. Can't pinpoint when it started but seems it was probably well before last November? Seems this crisis will be completely washed out by this larger viewpoint.
That first link also makes you wonder what the UN is planning on doing to kill 2.5 more of us per 1000 by 2050, lol. Maybe they really don't want ALL of us dead? Just a substantial increase every year ...
She's just mad it's not her doing all the killing.
Whew lad!
The vilest of the vile. I can't decide who is worse, her or Pelosi. Both are massive shit cannons.
but I'm not an extremely sad, bitter, vindictive example of the type of person no one wants to be
She's a fucking goblin. Almost makes me feel sorry for Bill. Almost.
She is sis scary and evil!
This is so petty at a time of national unity. It's amazing how deranged the Left has become. Even in 2001 with Bush, a President liberals despised, Democrats rallied behind him.
I guess if it had been 2004 (election year) things would have been different.
Hillary is very lucky that the vector for transmitting this disease is not via beaver munching.
She'd be Patient Zero!
She's mad because her test for presdential came back negative.
Edit: Chilling to think that such a hateful woman came close to the presidency
Do we also lead in chinese virus deaths? What about mysterious cellphone disappearances? What about self medication poisonings?