OT: Corona virus

[geofflambert]

From the WP today

[Sammy5IsAlive]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

From the WP today

Similar graphs/figures for various countries/regions worldwide here

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-338 ... 5c6fac846c

Deaths in Bergamo were 463% higher than normal [:(]

Also an interesting insight into what might be happening in less developed countries - Guayas Province in Ecuador has only reported 245 official Covid deaths. But number of overall deaths is 10,000 higher than normal - an increase of c.350% - worse than all of the reported regions apart from Bergamo.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

From the WP today

I'm reading that as ~3500-4000 'excess deaths' not accountable for COVID-19. Out of ~55,000 expected deaths. I'm guessing that 'elective surgeries' that weren't done that resulted in the demise of the patient are at least a significant part of that. A good article in the WSJ about several cases where scheduled recipients of cardiac stents or pacemakers couldn't survive to the (delayed) surgery time. Same with cancer chemotherapy or radiation therapy, etc. etc. We may very well find that the 'cure was worse than the disease' when we parse out the impact of delaying/closing non-COVID-19 medical therapies of all types.

[Canoerebel]

That's a weird looking graph. It's more than three weeks old, the vertical axis is set from 40k to 60k, and the presentation is hard to follow - at least for me. It seems to suggest there were no abnormal deaths through mid March but nearly 10k more per week by April 4....and skyrocketing! So the chart seems to represent and out-of-control contagion....but the facts don't bear that out. At the rate the line on the chart is increasing, you'd expect to find something like 40k or 50k or perhaps more in additional mortalities per week by now, three weeks since April 4. Yet, the US has only had a total of 55k Covid deaths. So I guess the chart is suggesting that we've probably had something like 200k or 500k deaths since mid-March, rather than the 55k reported? Yet the media, politicians, and medical community have missed that? Unlikely.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

From the WP today

Similar graphs/figures for various countries/regions worldwide here

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-338 ... 5c6fac846c

Deaths in Bergamo were 463% higher than normal [:(]

Also an interesting insight into what might be happening in less developed countries - Guayas Province in Ecuador has only reported 245 official Covid deaths. But number of overall deaths is 10,000 higher than normal - an increase of c.350% - worse than all of the reported regions apart from Bergamo.

Mate, those nightmare numbers you cite aren't anywhere near what the graphic is positing. 350%-463% higher than normal? Gawddd...[:(] The graphics posted suggest perhaps a 10% difference at the most.

[RangerJoe]

I agree about the weird looking graph. To me, it is done that way just to make it look more dramatic.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

From the WP today

I'm reading that as ~3500-4000 'excess deaths' not accountable for COVID-19. Out of ~55,000 expected deaths. I'm guessing that 'elective surgeries' that weren't done that resulted in the demise of the patient are at least a significant part of that. A good article in the WSJ about several cases where scheduled recipients of cardiac stents or pacemakers couldn't survive to the (delayed) surgery time. Same with cancer chemotherapy or radiation therapy, etc. etc. We may very well find that the 'cure was worse than the disease' when we parse out the impact of delaying/closing non-COVID-19 medical therapies of all types.

Heck, read the small print: "estimates for expected deaths come from the Yale School of Public Health's Modeling unit." In other words a guess.

[Cap Mandrake]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

I agree about the weird looking graph. To me, it is done that way just to make it look more dramatic.

Oh, it is. The Y-axis is abbreviated. That makes the variation appear much larger compared to the seasonal value

[Sammy5IsAlive]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

From the WP today

Similar graphs/figures for various countries/regions worldwide here

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-338 ... 5c6fac846c

Deaths in Bergamo were 463% higher than normal [:(]

Also an interesting insight into what might be happening in less developed countries - Guayas Province in Ecuador has only reported 245 official Covid deaths. But number of overall deaths is 10,000 higher than normal - an increase of c.350% - worse than all of the reported regions apart from Bergamo.

Mate, those nightmare numbers you cite aren't anywhere near what the graphic is positing. 350%-463% higher than normal? Gawddd...[:(] The graphics posted suggest perhaps a 10% difference at the most.

Say we look at Bergamo as the most extreme example. The graph is a little difficult to read because of the stretched scale. But it looks like their historical weekly deaths were running at c.200pw. So over a roughly 6 week period they would see c.1200 deaths. If over the same period they had 4600 excess deaths (i.e. total of 5800) that would work out as an increase of 380%. I guess the 'extra' 100% comes from my eyeball estimates of the historical weekly deaths and the period they are measuring over are not accurate (e.g. if you had 190pw historical rate and a 5 week period you would get 484%)

Or you could look in a slightly different way at the NYC one. 'Normal deaths' look to be around 1000pw. At the very peak of the outbreak deaths were at 6000pw - so a 500% increase. However that was the extreme and once you take into account the periods before and after the increase over the whole period comes down to c.300%.

So I think the graphs say what they are saying (if that makes sense). Whether you feel that the mortality figures (both historical and in terms of what are being reported as the contemporary figures) are accurate is another thing - the report simply says that the numbers have come from their own 'mortality analysis' and gives no further details of where those figures came from. Which strikes me as being pretty unsatisfactory scientifically.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive




Similar graphs/figures for various countries/regions worldwide here

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-338 ... 5c6fac846c

Deaths in Bergamo were 463% higher than normal [:(]

Also an interesting insight into what might be happening in less developed countries - Guayas Province in Ecuador has only reported 245 official Covid deaths. But number of overall deaths is 10,000 higher than normal - an increase of c.350% - worse than all of the reported regions apart from Bergamo.

Mate, those nightmare numbers you cite aren't anywhere near what the graphic is positing. 350%-463% higher than normal? Gawddd...[:(] The graphics posted suggest perhaps a 10% difference at the most.

Say we look at Bergamo as the most extreme example. The graph is a little difficult to read because of the stretched scale. But it looks like their historical weekly deaths were running at c.200pw. So over a roughly 6 week period they would see c.1200 deaths. If over the same period they had 4600 excess deaths that would work out as an increase of 380%. I guess the 'extra' 100% comes from my eyeball estimates of the historical weekly deaths and the period they are measuring over are not accurate (e.g. if you had 190pw historical rate and a 5 week period you would get 484%)

I'm sorry Sammy5IsAlive-my previous commentary was brusque and was also incomplete. Thank you for posting the other chart-it was interesting.

What I meant to say was that the other chart's 'excess mortality' (which is eye watering in some provinces / countries) doesn't look similar to the 'excess mortality' chart shown of the US. The idea of a *chart* of excessive mortality may be a similar chart idea, but what these charts showed was not 'similar' to the US chart. A ~10% increase in excess mortality versus a 400% excess mortality spike is not 'similar' in my eyes. ETA: but the chart in your article of NYC was quite striking too.

If this is the case, it also suggests that we've actually done a pretty good job stateside accounting for COVID-19 mortality. Particularly compared to other regions.

[Sammy5IsAlive]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy




Mate, those nightmare numbers you cite aren't anywhere near what the graphic is positing. 350%-463% higher than normal? Gawddd...[:(] The graphics posted suggest perhaps a 10% difference at the most.

Say we look at Bergamo as the most extreme example. The graph is a little difficult to read because of the stretched scale. But it looks like their historical weekly deaths were running at c.200pw. So over a roughly 6 week period they would see c.1200 deaths. If over the same period they had 4600 excess deaths that would work out as an increase of 380%. I guess the 'extra' 100% comes from my eyeball estimates of the historical weekly deaths and the period they are measuring over are not accurate (e.g. if you had 190pw historical rate and a 5 week period you would get 484%)

I'm sorry Sammy5IsAlive-my previous commentary was brusque and was also incomplete. Thank you for posting the other chart-it was interesting.

What I meant to say was that the other chart's 'excess mortality' (which is eye watering in some provinces / countries) doesn't look similar to the 'excess mortality' chart shown of the US. The idea of a *chart* of excessive mortality may be a similar chart idea, but what these charts showed was not 'similar' to the US chart. A ~10% increase in excess mortality versus a 400% excess mortality spike is not 'similar' in my eyes. ETA: but the chart in your article of NYC was quite striking too.

If this is the case, it also suggests that we've actually done a pretty good job stateside accounting for COVID-19 mortality. Particularly compared to other regions.

Ah ok I understand where you are coming from now - don't worry about it. I was being inaccurate in my use of similar - i.e. that the FT charts were showing something similar in terms of comparing historical mortality with 'contemporary' mortality. I didn't mean to say that the patterns/numbers were similar also.

I think that the Bergamo numbers give a warning of how bad things can get if hospitals get overwhelmed. I think they (and Lombardy in general) are pretty much the only ones to have experienced that particular nightmare. I do also wonder if they were bringing elderly people to hospital from care homes and recording their deaths which I think most other European countries have not been doing. [Edit - alternatively many more of their elderly live in the community with their family and not in care homes]

[durnedwolf]

I thought this a pretty good interview on COVID-19 and general health.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lze-rMYLf2E

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

I think that the Bergamo numbers give a warning of how bad things can get if hospitals get overwhelmed. I think they (and Lombardy in general) are pretty much the only ones to have experienced that particular nightmare. I do also wonder if they were bringing elderly people to hospital from care homes and recording their deaths which I think most other European countries have not been doing. [Edit - alternatively many more of their elderly live in the community with their family and not in care homes]

Yes. I recall seeing an article about massive deaths piling up in the streets of Ecuador a few weeks back. Didn't pay it much attention at the time, but now it makes sense. Safe to say that their system was overwhelmed and incapable of dealing with such a surge of disease and, ultimately, deaths (per the EM map).

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Sammy5IsAlive

I think that the Bergamo numbers give a warning of how bad things can get if hospitals get overwhelmed. I think they (and Lombardy in general) are pretty much the only ones to have experienced that particular nightmare. I do also wonder if they were bringing elderly people to hospital from care homes and recording their deaths which I think most other European countries have not been doing. [Edit - alternatively many more of their elderly live in the community with their family and not in care homes]

Yes. I recall seeing an article about massive deaths piling up in the streets of Ecuador a few weeks back. Didn't pay it much attention at the time, but now it makes sense. Safe to say that their system was overwhelmed and incapable of dealing with such a surge of disease and, ultimately, deaths (per the EM map).

Just so other can see the regional graphs. Ecuador only lists something like 576 deaths due to Covid so far.

I've been following Indonesia closely since the beginning, as they're doing almost nothing, testing very little (196 tests/million people), and just letting it ride. In the beginning, when they reported no cases, people were flying out and testing positive elsewhere.

Looks like Jakarta is having a hard time, and if so I would guess the rest is or will be soon.

[obvert]

While I hope lockdowns can end everywhere soon, the new rise in cases in both Japan and Singapore is sobering. Both did well to keep things open and keep cases low early. All of a sudden it's getting bad in both places, and both have locked down.

This is about Singapore's recent spike, with over 3,000 cases in the past three days (at time of writing, which was almost a week ago).

They're now up over 13k cases and rising at around 1,000/day still.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... three-days

[DD696]

They were driving from North Carolina into the city limits of Savannah. Long ways to go to get a "do".

[Canoerebel]

Man, that's a long way.

[Lowpe]

Here is another Stat article, a good one for all I think.

Scientists who express different views on Covid-19 should be heard, not demonized

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/27/hea ... tack-them/

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Here is another Stat article, a good one for all I think.

Scientists who express different views on Covid-19 should be heard, not demonized

https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/27/hea ... tack-them/

Great article, Lowpe. Thank you for sharing.

[MakeeLearn]

Coronavirus “Why are so many healthcare workers dying?”
27 April 2020

https://williambowles.info/2020/04/27/c ... ers-dying/



"Media reports paint a picture of healthcare workers being hit very hard by the pandemic, but the statistics suggest otherwise"

"The deaths of doctors, nurses and other medical workers has been a major talking point since the pandemic began.

It started in Italy, where a website was set up listing the deaths of doctors who “died on the frontlines”.

Despite being billed as “frontline” doctors, fifteen of the names are dentists. There are also surgeons, psychiatrists, paediatricians and other specialists who obviously would not have been “on the frontlines” treating Covid19 patients."

"When Swiss Propaganda Research noted that many of them were retired, and that average age was over sixty-nine, the dates of birth were removed."

https://off-guardian.org/2020/04/27/cor ... ers-dying/