- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) ***W.H.O. DECLARES A GLOBAL PANDEMIC***
Posted on 5/18/20 at 11:05 am to wm72
Posted on 5/18/20 at 11:05 am to wm72
quote:
My point has not been that no "extra" deaths compared to average were not a regular heart attack of someone that didn't want or didn't have regular access to an ambulance. My point is that this is certainly not all of the extra deaths. Common sense dictates that some, likely many, of those are also due to Covid.
How did you quantify those extra non-Covid deaths? These lockdowns and healthcare disruptions are unprecedented in modern times. We have an aging population with high levels of existing disease, and we've reduced their access to monitoring , diagnosis and treatment. I think it would be a mistake to minimize that contribution to excess mortality.
This post was edited on 5/18/20 at 11:08 am
3
Posted on 5/18/20 at 11:47 am to wdhalgren
Suicide numbers, including child suicides, would be interesting to look at right now too.
Posted on 5/18/20 at 1:00 pm to wdhalgren
quote:
How did you quantify those extra non-Covid deaths? These lockdowns and healthcare disruptions are unprecedented in modern times. We have an aging population with high levels of existing disease, and we've reduced their access to monitoring , diagnosis and treatment. I think it would be a mistake to minimize that contribution to excess mortality.
I said plainly that you can't say ALL of the extra deaths are Covid. Some are obviously exactly what you say.
However, you also can't say that NONE of the unspecified home deaths are due to Covid. A decent percentage most certainly are.
But if someone goes to painstaking lengths to subtract 10% of Covid deaths as being questionable without also considering that the same thing can be done to ADD them from all the unassigned deaths at home it doesn't suggest that accuracy is the goal.
Posted on 5/18/20 at 2:44 pm to wm72
Some people, maybe you, are confusing models and case counts. Until mid-April, the US was counting cases. Now people are trying to insert model numbers, using excess mortality or counting undiagnosed deaths. We don't have historical data on this novel virus, and we've changed other parameters that can affect health outcomes, so the models aren't good data.
There seems to be an assumption that counting excess mortality as Covid, or undiagnosed deaths as Covid, or every death in a person with a positive test as Covid, is the safe way to proceed here. That's incorrect. When you implement an untested and undoubtedly dangerous regime of healthcare realignment, social isolation, and economic shutdown, the cure may well ending up causing more deaths than the disease. In that situation, we need to use solid clinical evidence to assign deaths as accurately as possible, because overcounting Covid deaths is as risky as undercounting, maybe more risky. If there is no good clinical evidence, e.g., an 85 yo with heart disease found dead at home with no postmortem w/u, then you do the safe thing and call it natural causes.
Right now we don't have good ways to treat Covid-19, but we know that it has a low fatality rate for most demographic groups. It would be a shame if we mistakenly over-emphasize that disease and in the process cause other deaths that were avoidable.
There seems to be an assumption that counting excess mortality as Covid, or undiagnosed deaths as Covid, or every death in a person with a positive test as Covid, is the safe way to proceed here. That's incorrect. When you implement an untested and undoubtedly dangerous regime of healthcare realignment, social isolation, and economic shutdown, the cure may well ending up causing more deaths than the disease. In that situation, we need to use solid clinical evidence to assign deaths as accurately as possible, because overcounting Covid deaths is as risky as undercounting, maybe more risky. If there is no good clinical evidence, e.g., an 85 yo with heart disease found dead at home with no postmortem w/u, then you do the safe thing and call it natural causes.
Right now we don't have good ways to treat Covid-19, but we know that it has a low fatality rate for most demographic groups. It would be a shame if we mistakenly over-emphasize that disease and in the process cause other deaths that were avoidable.
This post was edited on 5/18/20 at 3:04 pm
Posted on 5/18/20 at 2:47 pm to Sasquatch Smash
quote:I’m not sure we would see a measurable difference in suicides if/until there is long-term unemployment. In Japan (high work pressure) suicides are down but in Australia (much more laid back), suicides are up. Since we probably fall somewhere in the middle in terms of work demands, I could see it working both ways (in the short-term) and having little to no impact
Suicide numbers, including child suicides, would be interesting to look at right now too.
And as it pertains to children/teens, which make up a smaller percentage of suicides, but a suicides make up a higher percentage of deaths (e.g., since they have fewer deaths overall), all-cause mortality appears to be down in Europe and the US.
Posted on 5/18/20 at 3:12 pm to wdhalgren
Those excess deaths are either directly or indirectly a result of the pandemic. They all count.
Posted on 5/18/20 at 3:13 pm to wdhalgren
quote:
Some people, maybe you, are confusing models and case counts. Until mid-April, the US was counting cases. Now people are trying to insert model numbers, using excess mortality or counting undiagnosed deaths.
If we only count only dying after a positive test in a hospital -- especially considering the large percentage of people who were told to stay home and not come to the hospital in badly affected areas -- then we do so knowing with 100% certainty that the amount of deaths that yields will be much lower than the actual number.
I'm not sure how you could then "use" that number which is so obviously incorrect to inform any thoughtful decision.
That's just common sense.
Posted on 5/18/20 at 3:18 pm to Whiznot
quote:
Those excess deaths are either directly or indirectly a result of the pandemic. They all count.
We need to know which deaths are due to the virus, and which are due to the policies enacted by local, state, and federal governments. If we don't try to accurately identify the specific cause, there's no way to evaluate those aggressive policies.
This post was edited on 5/18/20 at 3:36 pm
Posted on 5/18/20 at 3:30 pm to wm72
quote:
If we only count only dying after a positive test in a hospital -- especially considering the large percentage of people who were told to stay home and not come to the hospital in badly affected areas -- then we do so knowing with 100% certainty that the amount of deaths that yields will be much lower than the actual number.
I'm not sure how you could then "use" that number which is so obviously incorrect to inform any thoughtful decision.
That's just common sense.
It's well known in medicine that unproven treatments can do more harm than good. The main tool we've used against this virus so far are unproven containment strategies that definitely have harmful side effects. You want to start assigning deaths without a diagnosis of what killed the patient, and if the deaths increase then presumably we need more of the unproven risky containment strategies. That is not a scientific approach and that's how "public health" can cause great harm.
This post was edited on 5/18/20 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 5/18/20 at 3:32 pm to wdhalgren
Trump just announced he has been taking hydroxychloroquine for weeks....
Posted on 5/18/20 at 3:47 pm to lsupride87
Neil Cavuto just threw a total hissy fit over it too. Told everyone they would die if they take it 
This post was edited on 5/18/20 at 3:48 pm
Posted on 5/18/20 at 4:51 pm to wdhalgren
quote:
We need to know which deaths are due to the virus, and which are due to the policies enacted by local, state, and federal governments.
I don't disagree with you that, of course, we need to get better ideas of how many uncounted people died at home due to Covid and how many may have died due to other reasons.
However, merely admitting that there simply have to be a lot of uncounted Covid deaths without even putting an exact number/percentage on it is not the least bit more "dangerous" than choosing to believe an obviously incorrect number is precise enough to base any intelligent decision upon.
Speaking of unverifiable and imprecise: How in the world can one start to quantify with the scientific precision you demand of Covid deaths which deaths were "caused by government policy"?
That's where it really becomes pure conjecture between some people really not having access due to the shutdown but others not having access because EMTs were busy and others who were just afraid to go.
If you apply your same rigorous standard for even discussing Covid deaths, there is no reason to even discuss that.
Posted on 5/18/20 at 4:51 pm to upgrayedd
I think it was typical off the cuff dumbass insecure Trump to mention it
Does far more harm than good to mention this
Does far more harm than good to mention this
Posted on 5/18/20 at 5:45 pm to lsupride87
Have y’all completed the collection of samples for the Ochsner antibody study?
Posted on 5/18/20 at 5:47 pm to wm72
quote:
merely admitting that there simply have to be a lot of uncounted Covid deaths without even putting an exact number/percentage on it is not the least bit more "dangerous" than choosing to believe an obviously incorrect number is precise enough to base any intelligent decision upon.
We've realigned the healthcare system to diagnose and treat Covid-19, to the detriment of normal diagnosis and treatment. I'm merely admitting that there simply have to be a lot of uncounted deaths from the normal disease contributors to human mortality, all those things that kill millions of people per year under optimal conditions. Devastation to the economy is causing deaths too, and those will increase over time. Attributing excess mortality to Covid without knowing how much is self induced is incorrect and dangerous because it potentially leads the country further down the wrong policy road.
quote:
How in the world can one start to quantify with the scientific precision you demand of Covid deaths which deaths were "caused by government policy"?
When govt policy is negatively affecting the normal delivery of healthcare, you can start by not throwing excess mortality into the Covid category by default. Make an honest attempt to categorize deaths accurately. If you can't reasonably identify the cause of death, simply admit that it could be due to viral infection or due to healthcare failures cause by an over-reaching policy response.
Not only should we be making effort to quantify current deaths due to policy, we should also be seriously discussing future deaths due to economic disruption. Debt monetization, handouts of cash to individuals, corporate bailouts, small business failures, extreme unemployment, etc; the scope and consequence of this response is massive and will have long lasting negative repercussions. If you just throw up your hands and say we can't quantify that, then based on epidemiologic data so far I'd err on the side of doing too little and let this pandemic run its course.
You continually make the same assumption; covid is the most likely culprit so we have to admit it's causing most of this excess, undiagnosed mortality. It's not a safe assumption and runs the risk of perpetuating a bigger problem. Defending an unprecedented, unproven and risky policy approach by assuming that it's doing more good than harm is not science.
This post was edited on 5/18/20 at 6:21 pm
Posted on 5/18/20 at 6:17 pm to wdhalgren
quote:But the excess deaths are occurring globally, in places where the system has been changed rather minimally (Sweden), and as I said in the chrome’s PT thread is more prominent in places that testing would indicate missed cases, even in places not hit very hard.
We've realigned the healthcare system to diagnose and treat Covid-19
Posted on 5/18/20 at 6:17 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
Neil Cavuto just threw a total hissy fit over it too. Told everyone they would die if they take it
No, he stated facts. We have two solid studies now that have conclusively demonstrated that hydroxychloroquine has no statistical benefits, but it can cause death among people with pre-existing conditions. The original French study that indicated potential benefits had a deeply flawed methodology, and it's time for people to just let this bullshite go.
No matter how much people here love Trump, he's absolutely 100% wrong on this issue, and his insistence on touting the drug is completely irresponsible.
Posted on 5/18/20 at 6:38 pm to MikeyFL
quote:
We have two solid studies now that have conclusively demonstrated that hydroxychloroquine has no statistical benefits
Posted on 5/18/20 at 6:55 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
But the excess deaths are occurring globally, in places where the system has been changed rather minimally (Sweden),
I don't know much about Sweden's response other than no mandated social distancing, but globally most countries have undergone some sort of lockdown/isolation protocol that was as disruptive as ours. Did Sweden continue doing elective procedures, or did they empty out the hospitals and clinics like we did in this country.
quote:
more prominent in places that testing would indicate missed cases, even in places not hit very hard.
Are you talking about anecdotes or a study?
This post was edited on 5/18/20 at 6:57 pm
Posted on 5/18/20 at 7:11 pm to wdhalgren
quote:I’m talking about data (states with the lowest per capita test rates, highest positive test rates, abnormally high case fatality rates) tend to have a higher percentage of excess deaths that are categorized as non-COVID, whether they’re among the hardest hit states (New Jersey) or not (Ohio, Texas, Virginia). And some places had less extreme lockdown (Texas) policies.
Are you talking about anecdotes or a study?
This post was edited on 5/18/20 at 7:13 pm
Page 1108 of 1190
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News