The Next Pandemic: SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19

[GG]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

If you're correct, and you work the math backwards then, that would put the population of NYC at less than 7,000,000?  I believe the surrounding metro area would be way bigger than that.  Not a big deal, but it all goes to everyone's fixation on the numbers.

The 149/day number is NYC only, not the metro area.  If you're looking at the metro area, the toll is much higher, because the NJ-commuter counties are also getting hammered.

[B-Man]

 

 

AS ANYONE WHO HAS EVER STUDIED THIS STUFF KNOWS,  WITH A RESPIRATORY VIRUS YOU NEED HERD IMMUNITY. NOTHING ELSE WILL WORK:  

 

COVID cases trending down, states without lockdowns do better.

 

And the way to get herd immunity is to concentrate on keeping the at-risk from catching it, while letting as many of the non-at-risk as possible catch it and get over it, so that this will protect the at-risk.

 

What we’re doing instead, besides violating the basic rights of Americans and destroying the economy and giving us famine (bet you! I know what happens when the government declares who can and can’t work. There’s always missed steps and slips in the distribution, and sooner or later famine.) as a second order effect, is also bloody stupid from an immunological perspective. Quite possibly the stupidest thing we could do short of shooting everyone through the head, because that would save them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

[GG]

Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:

Yes, it is a conspiracy. The answer for all things! It's a conspiracy!!

You have a great day. ?

 

 

Then don't talk about these numbers being "cooked" by somebody, because the numbers are what they are.  

[meazza]

10 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Yup, I am sick. You got me.

You are so gloomed onto anyone questioning what is going on with the COVID-19 data that you clearly cannot or will not, see what is going on with the manipulation of deaths "from" COVID-19.  This matters when trying to model, discuss why it is being spread, how it is being spread, how susceptible people are to it, what per-existing conditions are most susceptible to death when "with" COVID-19, etc. There is a lot of things to be learned, but only honest data can help draw honest conclusions.  Enough people are actually dying from COVID-19 that there is no need to assign it as a cause of death to someone who died from something else. That can only muddy the waters.



 

 

People are not having heart attacks, etc in the same number because Covid is increasing the speed at which these people would have died since they have a pre-existing condition.

 

Example, a nursing home here in Quebec got hit with 31 deaths in 2 weeks when they normally had 4 deaths a month.  Is that padding? Would they have died, yes, but they would have probably died within the year and not in a span of weeks.

[Buffalo_Gal]

2 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Then don't talk about these numbers being "cooked" by somebody, because the numbers are what they are.  

I went back and edited my post since I didn't read your question originally.

[SoCal Deek]

This death count debate has run its course.  Most of you don't even know what you're arguing for...or against.

My two cents.

[Joe Miner]

5 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Can you let go of the ***** conspiracy angle maybe for a minute?

 

People can fudge a lot of data.  But they cannot fudge the death rolls.  The real number that cannot be faked is the number of bodies that the city has to deal with.  And that number is at least 10K higher than in any other year.  This fall's and winter's flu was a bear, but NYC deaths didn't spike.   But they surely did starting in late march.  That's the reality.  Now, tell me what is your theory of why suddenly 10K New Yorkers are no longer with us, if not for the Wuhan virus.

 

You still can't just assume all additional 10k are Corona caused.

 

Maybe it's higher or maybe it's lower but it's lazy and possibly dangerous to just assume numbers ands publicize them.

 

If you say 10k and the real number is 9k does that mean Corona isn't a problem?  I don't believe that's what people are thinking.  But every day we're inundated with case numbers and death numbers,  and these things actually affect public behavior.

 

Get the numbers right.

[Buffalo_Gal]

1 minute ago, meazza said:

 

People are not having heart attacks, etc in the same number because Covid is increasing the speed at which these people would have died since they have a pre-existing condition.

 

Example, a nursing home here in Quebec got hit with 31 deaths in 2 weeks when they normally had 4 deaths a month.  Is that padding? Would they have died, yes, but they would have probably died within the year and not in a span of weeks.

That is plausible.  But again, as I wrote... the "from" and "with" makes a difference. It is why locking down someone with preexisting condition A would make sense, but only if the data is being entered correctly.




 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Uncle Joe]

I can't wait for the draft to get here so we can argue over draft picks instead of death numbers.

 

(Note: I am not assuming the virus goes away in a week.)

[GG]

4 minutes ago, Joe Miner said:

 

You still can't just assume all additional 10k are Corona caused.

 

Maybe it's higher or maybe it's lower but it's lazy and possibly dangerous to just assume numbers ands publicize them.

 

If you say 10k and the real number is 9k does that mean Corona isn't a problem?  I don't believe that's what people are thinking.  But every day we're inundated with case numbers and death numbers,  and these things actually affect public behavior.

 

Get the numbers right.

 

In NYS, the only number that may be in question is the additional 3,700 that NYC will be adding based on EMT's reports.  All other cases attributed to Wuhan had tested positive for the virus prior to death.  

 

7 minutes ago, meazza said:

 

People are not having heart attacks, etc in the same number because Covid is increasing the speed at which these people would have died since they have a pre-existing condition.

 

Example, a nursing home here in Quebec got hit with 31 deaths in 2 weeks when they normally had 4 deaths a month.  Is that padding? Would they have died, yes, but they would have probably died within the year and not in a span of weeks.

 

This is the exact causation of the virus vs the correlation argument many are making.  It doesn't matter if there were pre-existing conditions, without the virus very few of these people would die at this exact time.

[Joe Miner]

Just now, GG said:

 

In NYS, the only number that may be in question is the additional 3,700 that NYC will be adding based on EMT's reports.  All other cases attributed to Wuhan had tested positive for the virus prior to death.  

 

 

This is the exact causation of the virus vs the correlation argument many are making.  It doesn't matter if there were pre-existing conditions, without the virus very few of these people would die at this exact time.

Please define "very few" so we can all do the math and put this number question to bed.

[Buffalo Bills Fan]

9 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

That is plausible.  But again, as I wrote... the "from" and "with" makes a difference. It is why locking down someone with preexisting condition A would make sense, but only if the data is being entered correctly.




 

 

Just think it is a complex matter for everything.  Things truly not that simple with this Chinese virus. 

 

But I understand everyone points. GG, Mezza and you Gal all make good points. On everyone side on points. I'm just researching here now all of the receptor's in the body. More info comes i'll share it with that..

[GG]

Just now, Joe Miner said:

Please define "very few" so we can all do the math and put this number question to bed.

 

You can do a simple extrapolation of normal morbidity to what the current rates are.  Use the Quebec example above - 31 in 2 weeks, vs 4 in a month.  These figures are consistent when a senior facility is infected.   And NYC hasn't eliminated the heart attacks & strokes.  If anything, NY EMTs report a significant increase for cardiac arrest calls during this break out.  Just because it's not reported, doesn't mean it's not happening.    There's a reason NYC funeral homes are backed up into May.    

[Joe Miner]

12 minutes ago, GG said:

 

You can do a simple extrapolation of normal morbidity to what the current rates are.  Use the Quebec example above - 31 in 2 weeks, vs 4 in a month.  These figures are consistent when a senior facility is infected.   And NYC hasn't eliminated the heart attacks & strokes.  If anything, NY EMTs report a significant increase for cardiac arrest calls during this break out.  Just because it's not reported, doesn't mean it's not happening.    There's a reason NYC funeral homes are backed up into May.    

 

That's quite an oversimplified analysis.

 

The major assumption being that the ONLY cause for an increase in deaths of that small of a sample size is Corona.  Without looking at any other factors during that period of time, or having any way to control any of the other factors

 

It's quick and it's easy ands it probably gets you pretty close to the actual number, but it's not a 100%.  

 

Maybe it's better to present the death numbers like poll numbers? Give a margin of error.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

31 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

...not surprising....pent up "cabin fever" has a revolt brewing...……….

[Sundancer]

22 minutes ago, GG said:

 

There's a reason NYC funeral homes are backed up into May.    

 

Does "padding" number kill people?

 

The desire for people to minimize the reality of this is astounding.

 

More than 3X the number of normal deaths are happening in NYC FOR ALL CAUSES and there's some discussion about padding.  

[Joe Miner]

1 minute ago, Sundancer said:

 

Does "padding" number kill people?

 

The desire for people to minimize the reality of this is astounding.

 

More than 3X the number of normal deaths are happening in NYC FOR ALL CAUSES and there's some discussion about padding.  

 

Does reporting a more accurate number kill people?

 

 

[whatdrought]

3 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

Does "padding" number kill people?

 

The desire for people to minimize the reality of this is astounding.

 

More than 3X the number of normal deaths are happening in NYC FOR ALL CAUSES and there's some discussion about padding.  

Wanting accurate numbers, from the models to the reporting, is not minimizing anything. It’s rational human behavior. Assuming that what is being reported, and the severity therein, to be accurate is idiotic. 
 

It can be a real deal, and it can be a big deal and yet still be overblown by the media using false models and inflated numbers. 

[Buffalo Bills Fan]

Immerse Yourself in a Forest for Better Health

Spending time in forests makes us healthier.
Photo: Jennifer Miller

Most of us sense that taking a walk in a forest is good for us. We take a break from the rush of our daily lives. We enjoy the beauty and peace of being in a natural setting. Now, research is showing that visiting a forest has real, quantifiable health benefits, both mental and physical. Even five minutes around trees or in green spaces may improve health. Think of it as a prescription with no negative side effects that's also free.

Health Benefits From Forests

The reference list at the bottom of this page has links to specific studies on these benefits.

Exposure to forests and trees:

boosts the immune system

lowers blood pressure

reduces stress

improves mood

increases ability to focus, even in children with ADHD

accelerates recovery from surgery or illness

increases energy level

improves sleep

 

https://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/90720.html

 

Sorry going off topic being in forest helps immune system among other things. But still have to check out for ticks.

 

Just trying to something a feel good post lol.