who and what are you going to believe. Big study from Calif. blows covid-19 lethality away

a reply to: infolurker

USC antibody study shows coronavirus 'far more widespread,' death rate 'much lower'

m.washingtontimes.com...

For about four weeks now, there has been proof the Coronavirus is more widespread than first thought. As a result, the mortality rate is lower than what is being pushed.

I really think Sweden’s approach was the best with no mandatory lockdown.

Am I saying this approach would be right for highly populated New York City, no. For populations not so highly concentrated, yes.

Coronavirus: Has Sweden got its science right?
By Maddy Savage
BBC News, Stockholm

www.bbc.com...

In Stockholm, the epicentre of the virus so far, cases have largely plateaued, although there was a spike at the end of this week, put down partly to increased testing.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Ok. But in the future, if cancer deaths are abnormally low for this period as an example. What does that indicate.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: tanstaafl

Ok. But in the future, if cancer deaths are abnormally low for this period as an example. What does that indicate.

COVID-19 cures cancer?

originally posted by: ketsuko
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: tanstaafl

Ok. But in the future, if cancer deaths are abnormally low for this period as an example. What does that indicate."

COVID-19 cures cancer?

You beat me to it...

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: vonclod
Did you compare a month of flu deaths to a month of covid deaths, I'm guessing you are comparing a years flu stats to roughly a month of covid stats.

Not arguing for anything here, other than tired of BS stats from all sides.

A couple of problems with this is - a) people don't die from the virus, they die from the complications from it, and the complications appear to be roughly the same - mostly SARS, and b) most people who die from the flu are not listed as dying from the flu, they are listed as dying from the underlying illness or complication.

And yes, b) means that there are far, far more deaths from flu than the stats show.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

No it's quite the opposite with flu deaths. Almost all pneumonia deaths are logged as a flu death.

The study is useless! It's not over yet! I don't know when people are going to realise the situation is ongoing, people are still being infected and dying. If 10 people are infected in total for the duration of the epidemic and 1 person dies and no more people get infected then you have hard data. As it is the virus hasn't spread that far in the U. S. Yet! To give any real hard figures. Give it a few more months then we'll see.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
AK is done with this crap.

So, someone says the states are forced by law to pad the numbers, I say there are examples which proves that claim wrong.

You try refute what I'm saying by stating that your state isn't going to comply.

That actually proves my point.

Also, it is funny how people react to numbers. 55K deaths is nothing according to some. 3 deaths, possibly counted twice, has you all in a huff.

a reply to: Boadicea

Actually, if taken with the caveat that it is a moving target, it is understood that things could swing one way or the other down the road. Still a snapshot can paint a positive picture. For example the death/recovery ratio for the US has been as high as 70%, this week there were many recoveries that brought it down to 46%.

It could be a change in protocols which is giving people a better chance of pulling through. Maybe just a group that was taking a little longer to recover and which made the previous numbers seem grim.

Honestly, the "CV-19 is nothing they are just using it to take away our rights" bunch are doing a fair amount of fear-mongering as well.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: 727Sky

Since people who do not have an illness, absolutely cannot die of it. Including the uninfected, in the mortality figures for a disease is not rational.

Perhaps that is why the mortality figures that these 'doctors' have produced, differ from official figures.

Normally, when calculating the mortality rates of a disease, it is related entirely to the death rates of those who are infected with the disease.

Not only that, but *known* infections (whether lab tested or clinical diagnosis.) For example, I'm 44 years old, and no doctor has ever been aware of me having "the flu" or "flu-like illness" - aside from annual check-ups, I've only ever been to a doctor or hospital for injuries and once for pneumonia.

In comparing, the mortalityrate of coronavirus vs influenza should be calculated the same - not "only those diagnosed" as the denominator for influenza, but "the whole population" as the denominator for the 'RonaRate.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Boadicea

Actually, if taken with the caveat that it is a moving target, it is understood that things could swing one way or the other down the road. Still a snapshot can paint a positive picture. For example the death/recovery ratio for the US has been as high as 70%, this week there were many recoveries that brought it down to 46%.

And in the big picture, that means nothing, for all the reasons I previously stated. Those numbers represent known and/or hospitalized cases. It does not represent total number infected. It does not represent the total number hospitalized. It does not represent the total number recovered. It does not represent the total number deceased.

Especially in terms of determining percentages and ratios, it means nothing.

It could be a change in protocols which is giving people a better chance of pulling through. Maybe just a group that was taking a little longer to recover and which made the previous numbers seem grim.

It could be many things. And most likely is a number of things alone and in combination.

Honestly, the "CV-19 is nothing they are just using it to take away our rights" bunch are doing a fair amount of fear-mongering as well.

Technically, I would say it's the opposite... presenting it as a "nothing burger" belies the true risks and dangers, and gives people a false sense of security (as opposed to fear mongering), and they do not take proper and appropriate precautions.

But the gross violation of our rights is spot on.

a reply to: Boadicea
No, it doesn't. It is a snapshot and should only be taken as such.

It doesn't matter what combination of things it is. The numbers can show positive trends, even if they are just snapshots.

The last part wasn't about your opinion, it was just an example of fear-mongering being done by those down-playing the situation.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Boadicea
No, it doesn't. It is a snapshot and should only be taken as such.

Okay. It's a snapshot of false and falsified statistics and ratios and I will take it as such.

It doesn't matter what combination of things it is. The numbers can show positive trends, even if they are just snapshots.

And if that "snapshot" shows a "positive trend" of people recovering because they only count the ones in-hospital, but ignore the ones who die alone and unassisted and untreated at home, then that "positive" trend is also false, and anyone who promotes it as such is a lying liar.

The last part wasn't about your opinion, it was just an example of fear-mongering being done by those down-playing the situation.

Technically, I did not give an opinion. I flat out stated that minimizing and denying any risk or danger is the opposite of fear mongering, as it does not inspire or invoke fear, but rather a false sense of security.

I also stated that the violation of our rights is spot on, and that is not an opinion either. It is fact.

Minimizing, rationalizing or otherwise trying to justify the violation is opinion.

Two. Just two. That's it. Two Doctors have come forward disagreeing with the majority of Doctors? Is that what I'm getting from this? Sorry but No. When more than two Drs are coming forward then I'm interested but just two single Drs, no. I'm a conspiracy theorist to the max, I'm still a believer in the Moon Landing Hoax which apparently isn't as popular as it once was (though I am still not a flat Earther lol) but I cannot believe that countries like China, who are already lying about their numbers are in cahoots with the US and a secret cabal attempting to over blow the virus. Now is it as bad as people are being told? Well let's just wait and get through this first then when we go back to normal...if we go back to normal then we can talk about it being over blown. Remember most not all but the majority of scientists are talking about it coming back or possibly staying into the Winter season so again let's wait until its done and defeated if we defeat it and then compare it to past flu like illnesses.

originally posted by: Boadicea
And if that "snapshot" shows a "positive trend" of people recovering because they only count the ones in-hospital, but ignore the ones who die alone and unassisted and untreated at home, then that "positive" trend is also false, and anyone who promotes it as such is a lying liar.

So you are hating on the hope-mongers as well as the fear-mongers.

Kinda hard to have definite numbers when the situation is on-going. Why complain about it either way if you are taking it as such?

Technically, I did not give an opinion. I flat out stated that minimizing and denying any risk or danger is the opposite of fear mongering, as it does not inspire or invoke fear, but rather a false sense of security.

I also stated that the violation of our rights is spot on, and that is not an opinion either. It is fact.

Minimizing, rationalizing or otherwise trying to justify the violation is opinion.

Actually, it was an opinion of what you thought was wrong and what you thought was "spot on".

It wasn't about that. I was just pointing out that those people are also fear-mongering.

a reply to: Dwoodward85

Sign...

What is the REAL death rate of COVID-19? Antibody testing studies suggest mortality rate is up to 70 TIMES lower than official figures - as scientists warn the number of infected is still too low to establish 'herd immunity

updated 00:23 24 Apr 2020


www.dailymail.co.uk...

Coronavirus death rate may be lower than previously thought
By Yasemin Saplakoglu

First Published 3 weeks ago

The death rate from COVID-19 is likely around 0.66%, if counting the mild or asymptomatic cases, according to a new study

CORONAVIRUS DEATH RATE COULD BE WAY LOWER THAN PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT, SCIENTISTS SAY

BY KASHMIRA GANDER ON 3/31/20 AT 11:54 AM EDT

www.newsweek.com...

Lower death rate estimates for coronavirus, especially for non-elderly, provide glimmer of hope
By SHARON BEGLEY @sxbegle
MARCH 16, 2020

www.statnews.com...

Preliminary German Study Shows a COVID-19 Infection Fatality Rate of About 0.4 Percent
Good news from a population screening study

RONALD BAILEY | 4.9.2020 3:05 PM

reason.com...

I think it’s more than one study?

a reply to: 727Sky

My understanding is that it’s the contagious nature of COVID 19 that is the main issue, not the death rate.

You can have a highly contagious disease and low death rate and it still is very dangerous because the odds of getting it are high, therefore ones odds of dying are relatively high.

I always knew the death rate they were saying had to be wrong simply because they didn't know how many people( and they still don't) have the disease.

originally posted by: neutronflux
I think it’s more than one study?

The vid in the OP isn't a study. It is just a calculation made with an inflated infection rate to output a low death rate.

Their agenda might be with good intentions but it is still flawed and it is still an agenda.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: neutronflux
I think it’s more than one study?

The vid in the OP isn't a study. It is just a calculation made with an inflated infection rate to output a low death rate.

Their agenda might be with good intentions but it is still flawed and it is still an agenda.

Do you actually read other people’s posts? Or just your own.

Preliminary German Study Shows a COVID-19 Infection Fatality Rate of About 0.4 Percent
Good news from a population screening study

RONALD BAILEY | 4.9.2020 3:05 PM

reason.com...

More at www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: daskakik

It’s been suspected and reported for a long time Coronavirus 19 is more wide spread and has a lower mortality rate than what is being pushed.

Sweden has not mandated a lockdown, and they are getting by.

It seems your the one with an agenda.

a reply to: daskakik

From March 16

Scientists find that up to 86 percent of coronavirus infections go undetected

By Alan Boyle on March 16, 2020 at 11:00 am

www.geekwire.com...

Computer modeling of the coronavirus outbreak’s course in China, in the weeks before a travel shutdown was imposed on Jan. 23, suggest that 86% of the infections went undocumented.