Coronavirus discussion thread

6272 posts / 0 new
Last post
pennzy
pennzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 19:45
Posts: 2419
Location: United States , Pa.

What is disturbing is there are confirmed cases of reinfection and anti bodies have disappeared in as little as a month. This is a complex virus we won’t fully understand for some time. Recommendations for now my turn out to be wrong.

moderator007
moderator007's picture
Offline
Last seen: 29 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 12/23/2012 - 04:47
Posts: 3724
Location: North Carolina

I have avoided this thread because I had figured it would turn political at some point, kudo’s for keeping it within the rules.
All we know about this is what we have been feed. I have seen alot of controversy on what each or any side is saying they know.
Even the numbers that we see each day are all over the place depending on where you look.
I have heard of people locally dying in a motorcycle crash that was contributed to covid, no joke.
I have heard of a local hospital (as a experiment) that sent in unused test that come back positive for covid.
I have heard that wearing a mask doesn’t help and then heard it does. My local hospital believes that unless its a N95 or equivalent for its employee’s, its not doing a thing even though they manditated wearing any kind of mask for everyone else.
I have seen doctors dealing with this virus with a different opinion than the establishment get banned from certain media outlets.
.
My point is who do you believe, almost everything we know (unless you have had hands on experience) about covid is only what we have been told or read.
The News isn’t reporting on “This is what happened today” anymore, it’s changed to “This is what we think happened today” or “This is all we are going to tell you happened today”.
It gets harder and harder ever day to figure out what’s fact or just someone’s opinion.
Like I said before we only know what we are feed, its up to us to use common sense to figure out what the truth is.
.
Sometimes when someone tells you something that seems odd do you ever stop and say “why did they tell me that”.
There’s usually a reason why they said it. Its up to you to figure out why.
Just my two cents Silly

pennzy
pennzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 19:45
Posts: 2419
Location: United States , Pa.

The internet has started a lot of new strange ways of seeing things. Cancel culture, fake news, etc. We still can believe most of what is told to us if we listen to the legitimate sources and not allow ourselves to be conned by bad actors with ulterior motives. Most news is not fake unless you get it from sources with agendas. They are pretty easy to spot if you are honest with yourself and don’t just listen to sources that reinforce your beliefs.

shirnask
shirnask's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 19 min ago
Joined: 03/21/2016 - 23:58
Posts: 1313
Location: Louisiana

I don’t believe that there is any news source without an agenda. Objective journalism, if it ever really existed, died a long time ago and most don’t even pretend anymore.

pennzy
pennzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 19:45
Posts: 2419
Location: United States , Pa.

shirnask wrote:
I don’t believe that there is any news source without an agenda. Objective journalism, if it ever really existed, died a long time ago and most don’t even pretend anymore.

True , personal filter has to be on constantly.
NorthernHarrier
NorthernHarrier's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 11/30/2018 - 12:05
Posts: 351
Location: Eastern USA

The problem is that many people don’t value knowing what is real and true as much as they value reinforcing what they want to believe. The fake news and false conspiracy theories are very popular, or there would not be a huge industry now that is paid a lot of money to churn out more of it to satisfy the demand and accomplish the financial or political goals (or both) of the people producing the stuff. We have much more information at our disposal now than even 20 years or 30 years ago – but our interest in evaluating the accuracy or inaccuracy of that information has not progressed beyond the Salem witch trials.

It isn’t that difficult to figure out where the most accurate sources of information are, on a given topic. If I want to learn about astrology, I ask an astrologist familiar with it. If I want to learn how to decorate a cake, I ask a baker. When it comes to learning what is true and what is not true with regard to a pandemic and deadly virus, I seek out sources who obtain their information using scientific methods best suited to producing accurate and reliable results on the relevant questions.

It helps to do a few minutes of reading on the basics of statistics, but it isn’t necessary to understand what a regression analysis is, or what a “p” value is, to know who produces peer-reviewed, scientific research with the least bias possible, and who will report changes in data and adjust their models, predictions, and recommendations accordingly. Unfortunately, many people have been led to believe (and want to believe) that any scientific body that changes its mind about a science issue because of new data, as it should, is “unreliable” or “lying.”

As for the major media, when one reads a report about a scientific issue in the major media, before deciding whether it is accurate or inaccurate one should determine where the reported information comes from and what methods were used to produce that information. Why should you give equal weight to everything everybody tells you, without considering where that information came from and how it was derived?

Again, if you’re motivated to learn about which media are more reliable for facts than others, there are sources of reporting on that that use methods that try to eliminate bias and determine who tells the truth, and who makes fewer mistakes in reporting, most often. But that is no substitute for always considering the source of the data being reported by the media source and looking at how that data was obtained.

Joshk
Joshk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 09/09/2015 - 12:12
Posts: 2482
Location: USA
Thumbs Up

Alas, people love to be hateful. It’s not new, it’s just easier. BTW, what ever happened to those nice Neanderthals? I hear something killed them all off.

moderator007
moderator007's picture
Offline
Last seen: 29 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 12/23/2012 - 04:47
Posts: 3724
Location: North Carolina

Makes me proud to see fellow members that see thru all the smoke to find the light at the end of the tunnel.
Stay safe and wish you well. Thumbs Up

Lightbringer
Lightbringer's picture
Online
Last seen: 5 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 08/30/2016 - 14:12
Posts: 12560
Location: nyc
NorthernHarrier wrote:
It isn’t that difficult to figure out where the most accurate sources of information are, on a given topic. If I want to learn about astrology, I ask an astrologist familiar with it. If I want to learn how to decorate a cake, I ask a baker. When it comes to learning what is true and what is not true with regard to a pandemic and deadly virus, I seek out sources who obtain their information using scientific methods best suited to producing accurate and reliable results on the relevant questions.

But the problem is that even “scientific studies” can be tainted, like those sponsored by Vested Interests who “scientifically” found that second-hand smoke is harmless. And if The Authorities can’t be trusted, or even if they can but they’re just wrong, then that’s just as bad.

Eg, Medical Authorities once truly believed that ailments can be cured by either drilling holes in your skull to let out the evil spirits ‘til your head looked like a wiffleball, and that leeches or plain ol’ bloodletting would “let the heat out of your veins” to cure a fever. People who questioned those methods would likely end up burned at the stake, at least professionally, maybe even literally.

Even something as basic as washing your hands before cutting open someone and playing with his innards was ridiculed, don’t forget.

Point being that The Authorities can be wrong through basic ignorance or even corruption. Either one is bad, and going against Official Doctrine can get you blacklisted, or just ridiculed as a quack or “conspiracy nut”.

Having an open mind works both ways, in that you need to question everything, even (or especially) that which you’re spoon-fed.

Eg, why was HCQ actively vilified? Not just “we don’t know if it works”, but “No! It doesn’t work, and we absolutely forbid any doctors from prescribing or using it!”. Like, wow, talk about overreactions…

Alas, the problem is that people would have to take so much time to research even one snippet presented as fact that it would be a fulltime job in itself, so people take shortcuts and rely on The Authorities and trust (operative word) their pronouncements, if not out of laziness then just pragmatism, to save all that time.

But that’s still no guarantee that those pronouncements aren’t wrong, either through ignorance (“best evidence we have at the moment”) or corruption (“can’t have the unwashed masses believing otherwise”).

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Muto
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 50 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2012 - 16:42
Posts: 2468
Location: Southeast, PA

NorthernHarrier wrote:
The problem is that many people don’t value knowing what is real and true as much as they value reinforcing what they want to believe. The fake news and false conspiracy theories are very popular, or there would not be a huge industry now that is paid a lot of money to churn out more of it to satisfy the demand and accomplish the financial or political goals (or both) of the people producing the stuff. We have much more information at our disposal now than even 20 years or 30 years ago – but our interest in evaluating the accuracy or inaccuracy of that information has not progressed beyond the Salem witch trials.

Again, if you’re motivated to learn about which media are more reliable for facts than others, there are sources of reporting on that that use methods that try to eliminate bias and determine who tells the truth, and who makes fewer mistakes in reporting, most often. But that is no substitute for always considering the source of the data being reported by the media source and looking at how that data was obtained.

Not motivated at all anymore.

Call me Covid Burned out!
All the news is slanted, they don’t even try to hide it anymore. They all effing lie for $$$$$$

All this pandemic has shown me is how Wonderful Humanity can be in crisis or how Evil it can be.
Unfortunately Evil is winning by a long shot.

Forget the political divide, it goes well beyond that.

If you want to know who will win the US election, follow the money.
Sad but true.
Thank the almighty for Booze Smile like many others, am self medicating. It’s keeping me alive.
Peace out.

Keith

“History doesn’t repeat itself, but it sometimes rhymes,” Mark Twain

After the Apocalypse there will be only 2 things left alive, Cockroaches and Keith Richards

“You’ll develop like a herd mentality,”
“It’s gonna be herd-developed and that’s gonna happen.”

Yep it already happened

xevious
xevious's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 02/27/2013 - 21:55
Posts: 1876
Location: Hoboken, NJ USA

NorthernHarrier wrote:
The epidemiologists, clinical doctors, Anthony Fauci, and the Centers For Disease Control have all been making the same prediction.
That they have. But this is based on typical flu season manifestations. This isn’t your typical flu. The USA has NOT had a mask wearing protocol before. If you wore a mask and were not Asian, they’d look at you funny (because in Asian culture, wearing a mask is commonplace when you’ve got a cold/virus). So, the flu would rapidly spread & infect a lot of people once windows & doors closed up for the cooler months. I have a feeling that if the social distancing & mask wearing protocol is kept up reasonably well, the autumn/winter spike won’t be as bad as forecast.
xevious
xevious's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 02/27/2013 - 21:55
Posts: 1876
Location: Hoboken, NJ USA

Lightbringer wrote:
Eg, why was HCQ actively vilified? Not just “we don’t know if it works”, but “No! It doesn’t work, and we absolutely forbid any doctors from prescribing or using it!”. Like, wow, talk about overreactions…

It’s not so simple. To be brief: HCQ with some other substances (like Zinc) seemed to help some people. But for some, it actually made matters worse. This is a deal breaker. Treatments must be effective & safe for a vast majority of people. They could not get enough consistent results for safety. As to why, it’s the rash of variations from person to person. This is why we’ve had such polarization about it. Someone takes a chance and it works for them, then they think it should for everyone and thus there’s a conspiracy to keep it out of the cure bucket. That’s just not true.
Lightbringer
Lightbringer's picture
Online
Last seen: 5 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 08/30/2016 - 14:12
Posts: 12560
Location: nyc
Muto wrote:
Thank the almighty for Booze Smile like many others, am self medicating. It’s keeping me alive.

Alcohol kills germs, so you’re on the right track!

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Lightbringer
Lightbringer's picture
Online
Last seen: 5 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 08/30/2016 - 14:12
Posts: 12560
Location: nyc
xevious wrote:
Lightbringer wrote:
Eg, why was HCQ actively vilified? Not just “we don’t know if it works”, but “No! It doesn’t work, and we absolutely forbid any doctors from prescribing or using it!”. Like, wow, talk about overreactions…
It’s not so simple. To be brief: HCQ with some other substances (like Zinc) seemed to help some people. But for some, it actually made matters worse. This is a deal breaker. Treatments must be effective & safe for a vast majority of people. They could not get enough consistent results for safety. As to why, it’s the rash of variations from person to person. This is why we’ve had such polarization about it. Someone takes a chance and it works for them, then they think it should for everyone and thus there’s a conspiracy to keep it out of the cure bucket. That’s just not true.

There’s this thing called “informed consent”. Even if a drug’s used off-label, if you know the risks and are willing to take them, you should be allowed to.

The problem, as usual, is that Our Benevolent Masters™ made that determination for us, that no, even if you want to, or need to, you won’t be allowed to.

Much better to overinflate peoples’ lungs to the bursting point instead, even if it kills them. (And it usually does.)

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Muto
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 50 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2012 - 16:42
Posts: 2468
Location: Southeast, PA
Lightbringer wrote:
Muto wrote:
Thank the almighty for Booze Smile like many others, am self medicating. It’s keeping me alive.

Alcohol kills germs, so you’re on the right track!

Always thought it keeps your immune system cranked up.
Alcohol is technically a poison.

Look how many times a Rocker quit the Booze, say they feel great and then BOOM, they are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, etc.
The booze kept it quiet, once it was gone the cancer cells said, “Here’s our chance, let’s get him/her”

Golfer John Daly comes to mind if you want an example recently.
My uncle Bob quit booze, got bladder cancer within 3 years and suffered a horrible death.

Maybe it’s just coincidence but makes you wonder.
Keith Richards is still alive and has an unbelievable memory.
Just saying.

“History doesn’t repeat itself, but it sometimes rhymes,” Mark Twain

After the Apocalypse there will be only 2 things left alive, Cockroaches and Keith Richards

“You’ll develop like a herd mentality,”
“It’s gonna be herd-developed and that’s gonna happen.”

Yep it already happened

Joshk
Joshk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 09/09/2015 - 12:12
Posts: 2482
Location: USA
Muto wrote:
Lightbringer wrote:
Muto wrote:
Thank the almighty for Booze Smile like many others, am self medicating. It’s keeping me alive.

Alcohol kills germs, so you’re on the right track!

Always thought it keeps your immune system cranked up.
Alcohol is technically a poison.

Look how many times a Rocker quit the Booze, say they feel great and then BOOM, they are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, etc.
The booze kept it quiet, once it was gone the cancer cells said, “Here’s our chance, let’s get him/her”

Golfer John Daly comes to mind if you want an example recently.
My uncle Bob quit booze, got bladder cancer within 3 years and suffered a horrible death.

Maybe it’s just coincidence but makes you wonder.
Keith Richards is still alive and has an unbelievable memory.
Just saying.

I’m just going to quote this horrifying logic for later reference.

pennzy
pennzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 19:45
Posts: 2419
Location: United States , Pa.
Muto wrote:
Lightbringer wrote:
Muto wrote:
Thank the almighty for Booze Smile like many others, am self medicating. It’s keeping me alive.

Alcohol kills germs, so you’re on the right track!

Always thought it keeps your immune system cranked up.
Alcohol is technically a poison.

Look how many times a Rocker quit the Booze, say they feel great and then BOOM, they are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, etc.
The booze kept it quiet, once it was gone the cancer cells said, “Here’s our chance, let’s get him/her”

Golfer John Daly comes to mind if you want an example recently.
My uncle Bob quit booze, got bladder cancer within 3 years and suffered a horrible death.

Maybe it’s just coincidence but makes you wonder.
Keith Richards is still alive and has an unbelievable memory.
Just saying.


That’s some dicey rationalization there. Maybe the booze caused the cancer. I think it has some mood enhancing benefits that might help and your blood pressure may go down when you feel well. Ah, what the hell, I vote for drinking.
MtnDon
MtnDon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 45 min ago
Joined: 08/27/2015 - 18:25
Posts: 3349
Location: Canuk in NM

As of December 2018 Keith Richards had more or less completely given up alcohol for about a year already at that time

https://www.today.com/popculture/keith-richards-says-he-quit-drinking-i-...

https://www.nme.com/news/music/keith-richards-cut-back-on-drinking-rolli...

pennzy
pennzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 19:45
Posts: 2419
Location: United States , Pa.

On a similar note, I knew a guy that worked until 85, retired, then shortly died. Some say he should of kept working and some say he should of retired earlier. Your call.

Muto
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 50 min ago
Joined: 09/04/2012 - 16:42
Posts: 2468
Location: Southeast, PA
Joshk wrote:
Muto wrote:
Lightbringer wrote:
Muto wrote:
Thank the almighty for Booze Smile like many others, am self medicating. It’s keeping me alive.

Alcohol kills germs, so you’re on the right track!

Always thought it keeps your immune system cranked up.
Alcohol is technically a poison.

Look how many times a Rocker quit the Booze, say they feel great and then BOOM, they are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, etc.
The booze kept it quiet, once it was gone the cancer cells said, “Here’s our chance, let’s get him/her”

Golfer John Daly comes to mind if you want an example recently.
My uncle Bob quit booze, got bladder cancer within 3 years and suffered a horrible death.

Maybe it’s just coincidence but makes you wonder.
Keith Richards is still alive and has an unbelievable memory.
Just saying.

I’m just going to quote this horrifying logic for later reference.

Quote away brother!

“History doesn’t repeat itself, but it sometimes rhymes,” Mark Twain

After the Apocalypse there will be only 2 things left alive, Cockroaches and Keith Richards

“You’ll develop like a herd mentality,”
“It’s gonna be herd-developed and that’s gonna happen.”

Yep it already happened

NorthernHarrier
NorthernHarrier's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 11/30/2018 - 12:05
Posts: 351
Location: Eastern USA
Lightbringer wrote:
NorthernHarrier wrote:
It isn’t that difficult to figure out where the most accurate sources of information are, on a given topic. If I want to learn about astrology, I ask an astrologist familiar with it. If I want to learn how to decorate a cake, I ask a baker. When it comes to learning what is true and what is not true with regard to a pandemic and deadly virus, I seek out sources who obtain their information using scientific methods best suited to producing accurate and reliable results on the relevant questions.

But the problem is that even “scientific studies” can be tainted, like those sponsored by Vested Interests who “scientifically” found that second-hand smoke is harmless. And if The Authorities can’t be trusted, or even if they can but they’re just wrong, then that’s just as bad.

Eg, Medical Authorities once truly believed that ailments can be cured by either drilling holes in your skull to let out the evil spirits ‘til your head looked like a wiffleball, and that leeches or plain ol’ bloodletting would “let the heat out of your veins” to cure a fever. People who questioned those methods would likely end up burned at the stake, at least professionally, maybe even literally.

Even something as basic as washing your hands before cutting open someone and playing with his innards was ridiculed, don’t forget.

Point being that The Authorities can be wrong through basic ignorance or even corruption. Either one is bad, and going against Official Doctrine can get you blacklisted, or just ridiculed as a quack or “conspiracy nut”.

Having an open mind works both ways, in that you need to question everything, even (or especially) that which you’re spoon-fed.

Eg, why was HCQ actively vilified? Not just “we don’t know if it works”, but “No! It doesn’t work, and we absolutely forbid any doctors from prescribing or using it!”. Like, wow, talk about overreactions…

Alas, the problem is that people would have to take so much time to research even one snippet presented as fact that it would be a fulltime job in itself, so people take shortcuts and rely on The Authorities and trust (operative word) their pronouncements, if not out of laziness then just pragmatism, to save all that time.

But that’s still no guarantee that those pronouncements aren’t wrong, either through ignorance (“best evidence we have at the moment”) or corruption (“can’t have the unwashed masses believing otherwise”).

I understand the scandal about second-hand smoke allegedly being harmless – my mother died a few months ago from a stroke and other health issues stemming most likely from all the second-hand smoke she inhaled as a child. But as I said, above, trusting an “authority” merely because they are an alleged authority isn’t a good way to find the most reliable information about any issue, including virus prevention and treatment. You need to at least minimally evaluate the methods and source from which the evidence was obtained – and nobody would argue today that the early studies on second-hand smoke coming from the tobacco industry were quality science by today’s standards.

It doesn’t have to be a time-consuming, complicated process – we know, for example, that information coming from peer-reviewed journals, where the methods and data are discussed, is more reliable than a video from a guy who isn’t telling you much about where his data came from or how it was obtained. Some medical academic institutions have posted online a lot of quality, peer-reviewed information derived from good science about Covid-19. Johns Hopkins University is one example.

The fact that today’s scientists can’t be 100% sure about their data or conclusions is no reason to give the same credence to information coming from non-scientific sources. A weather forecast isn’t 100% accurate, but do you therefore decide to predict the weather by reading the coffee grounds remaining in your cup, or asking a fortune teller for the forecast? Of course not. For some questions, science is the most reliable way we have to get to the truth, even though it isn’t 100% right all the time about every question. One benefit of the scientific approach is that it has a correction mechanism built into it. That wasn’t the case with the early tobacco industry pseudo-science, and it isn’t the case with a lot of the information we see now on the web that is agenda-driven junk.

pennzy
pennzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 19:45
Posts: 2419
Location: United States , Pa.

Hell, it goes all the way back to when the tobacco industry hired doctors to say smoking was good for you.

MtnDon
MtnDon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 45 min ago
Joined: 08/27/2015 - 18:25
Posts: 3349
Location: Canuk in NM

The “good old days”.

I believe the feds still subsidize tobacco farmers.
pennzy
pennzy's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 19:45
Posts: 2419
Location: United States , Pa.

You are correct. The settlement was sent to the states. Tobacco growing states did give some to the farmers.

Lightbringer
Lightbringer's picture
Online
Last seen: 5 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 08/30/2016 - 14:12
Posts: 12560
Location: nyc
pennzy wrote:
Hell, it goes all the way back to when the tobacco industry hired doctors to say smoking was good for you.

I recall old-timers mentioning that if someone had congestion, docs would actually recommend smoking menthol cigarettes. Sick

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Rexlion
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 39 min ago
Joined: 05/18/2019 - 16:59
Posts: 795
Location: Okla.

Lightbringer wrote:
…Eg, Medical Authorities once truly believed that ailments can be cured by either drilling holes in your skull to let out the evil spirits ‘til your head looked like a wiffleball….

Huh? You mean, that doesn’t actually work?? LOL

Seems like a useful treatment. If nothing else, the patient could stick a Noctigon K1 in his mouth, turn it on, and create a starry display on the ceiling……

NorthernHarrier
NorthernHarrier's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 11/30/2018 - 12:05
Posts: 351
Location: Eastern USA

“More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette”

Of course that was true at the time for people in every profession.

That ad reminds me of the joke Steve Martin borrowed from his roommate, Gary Muledeer, when he was an intern with the Smothers Brothers television show, to win a full-time job on the writing staff: “Studies show that more Americans watch television than any other appliance,”

Deputy Dog
Deputy Dog's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 09/15/2017 - 07:53
Posts: 429
Location: behind you
NorthernHarrier wrote:
Joshk wrote:
Am I alone in anticipating a sharp rise in death once we get to flu season? With flu as the “pre-existing condition”, just add Covid, and things get deadly. And you can even catch them both from the same person at the same time. Shocked Since I thought of it first, I want to name these double-spreaders. Let’s call them grim-reapers.

The epidemiologists, clinical doctors, Anthony Fauci, and the Centers For Disease Control have all been making the same prediction.

My point is/was what makes you guys (and the doctors) think that hasn’t happen already? I would argue that it already has, before testing for the virus started.

hank
hank's picture
Online
Last seen: 4 min 36 sec ago
Joined: 09/04/2011 - 21:52
Posts: 9382
Location: Berkeley, California
Quote:
Estimates of excess deaths can provide information about the burden of mortality potentially related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including deaths that are directly or indirectly attributed to COVID-19. Excess deaths are typically defined as the difference between the observed numbers of deaths in specific time periods and expected numbers of deaths in the same time periods. This visualization provides weekly estimates of excess deaths by the jurisdiction in which the death occurred. Weekly counts of deaths are compared with historical trends to determine whether the number of deaths is significantly higher than expected.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

NorthernHarrier
NorthernHarrier's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 11/30/2018 - 12:05
Posts: 351
Location: Eastern USA

Thanks, hank. I would add that, in addition to looking at the excess death rate across the USA, due to the much higher death rate from COVID-19, there are some other symptoms that are more common with COVID-19 than with a seasonal flu, for example swelling of the heart, and loss of ability to taste and smell. There were probably some cases of COVID-19 mistaken for the flu, but not a lot, or they would have figured out quickly that it wasn’t just the seasonal flu going around.

In addition, there has been enough reporting of positive tests in various locations around the world that scientists have a pretty good idea through contact tracing when and where the first people became infected in the USA with COVID-19. There is now some evidence being investigated that there might have been a few cases of infected people in the US a month or two earlier than previously thought, but we know there were not a large number of cases of COVID-19 infection in the USA before they could tell it wasn’t the flu. By the end of the year, when the death count in the USA is projected to be twice what it is now and the infection count also much higher, those early cases that weren’t distinguished from the flu will be an even smaller percentage of the total number of infected and dead than they are now.

Pages