"Coronavirus and the US" or "We are all going to die!!!!"

[Loren Pechtel]

Vaccination efficacy rates are likely to be between 40-60%,.

Is that enough?

With decent mask behavior it's enough.

Are you saying that amount of deaths in the US?

I think his death numbers are on the high side, the fatality rate appears to be under 1%. However, there's a reason that I've been saying Trump 2020k.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Vaccination efficacy rates are likely to be between 40-60%,.

Is that enough?

With decent mask behavior it's enough.

How likely is that, though? People get a vaccine, they want to believe they're SAFE. That they're Done, that we're back to normal.
The anti-vaxxers will say if you're stuck, they don't need to mask.
The anti-maskers will either be anti-vaxx (see above) or insist tge vaccine made them immune, or lie that they got the vaccine.

And anyone who just doesn't understand science (see all who won't mask, or mask but cut breathing holes, or wear the mask as a chin guard, or believe ANYTHING Bonespurs say) will reject masking after they get thed shot.

The other 5% of the goddamned country will only be slightly better off than we were pre-vaxx.

 

[repoman]

Seems that the sledgehammer non antibody immune system working well is what can get people over covid so fast that they don't even make antibodies for it.

 

[bilby]

Vaccination efficacy rates are likely to be between 40-60%,.

Is that enough?

With decent mask behavior it's enough.

Are you saying that amount of deaths in the US?

I think his death numbers are on the high side, the fatality rate appears to be under 1%. However, there's a reason that I've been saying Trump 2020k.

According to Worldometers, the Case Fatality Rate worldwide is about 4% (of around 28 million resolved cases), and the CFR in the USA is also about 4% (of just over 5 million resolved cases).

 

[repoman]

Odd that you are well more negative than me about covid, but you are a cornucipian regarding natural resources like fuels and metals and so on.

 

[George S]

With positivity rate being the major reason for lockdown in NYC...

Wouldn't the approaching to the level of herd immunity ALSO be a guarantee of lockdown?

Are the tests getting better and is that accounted for?

Nobody's approaching the level of herd immunity. Assuming (and it's still not clear) that herd immunity is even possible, it's not going to happen until either around 250 million Americans have had the disease or been vaccinated against it.

In the absence of a vaccine, reaching that level of exposure implies between three and fifteen million deaths, and between six and thirty million chronic disabilities from tissue damage, in the USA; so you're still (at best) less than ten percent of the way there.

Herd immunity via infection with the disease would be an unimaginable disaster, and no sane and educated person has ever considered it a reasonable objective towards which to aspire.

"Herd immunity" is a propaganda phrase that means "forget modern science and just get on with suffering like a bunch of medieval plague victims". It's beyond stupid.

Herd immunity (even though people don't come in herds) is the only way a viral epidemic is ended. It takes a number of people who cannot be infected when exposed.
There are a number of ways this can happen. The desired goal to reach herd immunity is 60-80% who cannot be infected. In the case of SARS-CoV-2 the "natural" means are T-cell, and B-cell immunity. T-cell immunity is generically targeting coronaviruses. From 40-60% have T-cell immunity from the common cold viruses (coronaviruses). B-cell immunity is the immune system creating antibodies during the disease so the "recovered" go in this bucket. A vaccine trains the B-cell system to recognize the virus and generate antibodies just as if recovered.
T-cell (60%) plus recovered (20%) leads to herd immunity. A a little higher, nearer 25%, seems to be the norm in regions exhibiting herd immunity. We might infer that the T-cell immunity is closer to 55% than 60%.

 

[bilby]

Odd that you are well more negative than me about covid, but you are a cornucipian regarding natural resources like fuels and metals and so on.

I don't think it's odd at all.

It just reflects the fact that I have a solid grounding in physics, chemistry, and biology.

The lithosphere is huge; everything (except helium) is recoverable with sufficient energy expenditure, and in comparison to the lithosphere, humans are small, ephemeral, and fragile, and particularly susceptible to diseases due to their social nature.

Optimism and pessimism are useless as guides to truth, and facts imply that both are warranted - and each topic likely warrants a different level of optimism.

If you seek to apply a single level of optimism or pessimism to every subject, you will be badly wrong about a number of things.

 

[bilby]

With positivity rate being the major reason for lockdown in NYC...

Wouldn't the approaching to the level of herd immunity ALSO be a guarantee of lockdown?

Are the tests getting better and is that accounted for?

Nobody's approaching the level of herd immunity. Assuming (and it's still not clear) that herd immunity is even possible, it's not going to happen until either around 250 million Americans have had the disease or been vaccinated against it.

In the absence of a vaccine, reaching that level of exposure implies between three and fifteen million deaths, and between six and thirty million chronic disabilities from tissue damage, in the USA; so you're still (at best) less than ten percent of the way there.

Herd immunity via infection with the disease would be an unimaginable disaster, and no sane and educated person has ever considered it a reasonable objective towards which to aspire.

"Herd immunity" is a propaganda phrase that means "forget modern science and just get on with suffering like a bunch of medieval plague victims". It's beyond stupid.

Herd immunity (even though people don't come in herds) is the only way a viral epidemic is ended. It takes a number of people who cannot be infected when exposed.
There are a number of ways this can happen. The desired goal to reach herd immunity is 60-80% who cannot be infected. In the case of SARS-CoV-2 the "natural" means are T-cell, and B-cell immunity. T-cell immunity is generically targeting coronaviruses. From 40-60% have T-cell immunity from the common cold viruses (coronaviruses). B-cell immunity is the immune system creating antibodies during the disease so the "recovered" go in this bucket. A vaccine trains the B-cell system to recognize the virus and generate antibodies just as if recovered.
T-cell (60%) plus recovered (20%) leads to herd immunity. A a little higher, nearer 25%, seems to be the norm in regions exhibiting herd immunity. We might infer that the T-cell immunity is closer to 55% than 60%.

You and I both know that GOP talking heads use the phrase without the slightest understanding of its meaning. As almost nobody else uses it at all, it's now a pure propaganda tool, except in tiny niche discussions amongst expert epidemiologists (of which this discussion board hosts none).

 

[repoman]

You hear that everyone?

Bilby's analysis transcends emotions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Vaccination efficacy rates are likely to be between 40-60%,.

Is that enough?

With decent mask behavior it's enough.

How likely is that, though? People get a vaccine, they want to believe they're SAFE. That they're Done, that we're back to normal.
The anti-vaxxers will say if you're stuck, they don't need to mask.
The anti-maskers will either be anti-vaxx (see above) or insist tge vaccine made them immune, or lie that they got the vaccine.

And anyone who just doesn't understand science (see all who won't mask, or mask but cut breathing holes, or wear the mask as a chin guard, or believe ANYTHING Bonespurs say) will reject masking after they get thed shot.

The other 5% of the goddamned country will only be slightly better off than we were pre-vaxx.

Unfortunately, you're probably right.

Herd immunity (even though people don't come in herds) is the only way a viral epidemic is ended. It takes a number of people who cannot be infected when exposed.
There are a number of ways this can happen. The desired goal to reach herd immunity is 60-80% who cannot be infected. In the case of SARS-CoV-2 the "natural" means are T-cell, and B-cell immunity. T-cell immunity is generically targeting coronaviruses. From 40-60% have T-cell immunity from the common cold viruses (coronaviruses). B-cell immunity is the immune system creating antibodies during the disease so the "recovered" go in this bucket. A vaccine trains the B-cell system to recognize the virus and generate antibodies just as if recovered.
T-cell (60%) plus recovered (20%) leads to herd immunity. A a little higher, nearer 25%, seems to be the norm in regions exhibiting herd immunity. We might infer that the T-cell immunity is closer to 55% than 60%.

So SARS is still running around??

It was stopped by aggressive testing and contact tracing. Herd immunity would have entailed hundreds of millions of deaths.

 

[J842P]

With decent mask behavior it's enough.



I think his death numbers are on the high side, the fatality rate appears to be under 1%. However, there's a reason that I've been saying Trump 2020k.

According to Worldometers, the Case Fatality Rate worldwide is about 4% (of around 28 million resolved cases), and the CFR in the USA is also about 4% (of just over 5 million resolved cases).

Yes, but Loren is probably talking about the infection fatality ratio, (IFR), of which, the Case Fatality Rate (CFR) will always be an upper bound. And given the amount of infections that go unnoticed, it is likely significantly different, 1% IFR being very realistic (maybe even too high).

 

[Tharmas]

I read an article about a month ago, either online or in a print source (I can’t remember where) that used the method of comparing death rates from 2020 with previous years to determine if there were a large number of “excess deaths,” not attributed to Covid-19, but which would give an indication of increased mortality nevertheless due to Covid, if that makes sense. I may not be expressing the idea too clearly. Deaths caused by Covid that were assumed to be by natural or other causes. In other words, the article I read concluded, there could be a much higher mortality rate than reported.

This website from the CDC gives a very detailed explanation and a ton of data. I am not trained in statistics and so can express no informed opinion, but I wonder what others here have to say.

 

[repoman]

extending the goal posts

Also, as people get the virus and "recover"...

(at least from acute stage - possible cardiac effects are a separate issue)

--- then the numbers of positives for many of the tests will go up until the something like 80 days after someone has "cleared symptoms."

There has to be some flexibility with these metrics.

Yes positivity rate is a very clear metric, but that is why it seems to be overweighted.

What are the Bayesian statistics for false positives of these tests?

The more cycles the PCR is run on a population unlikely to have covid, the higher t he proportion of false positives.

There is DAMN NEAR zero talk of this in the mass media.

 

[repoman]

Odd that you are well more negative than me about covid, but you are a cornucipian regarding natural resources like fuels and metals and so on.

I don't think it's odd at all.

It just reflects the fact that I have a solid grounding in physics, chemistry, and biology.

The lithosphere is huge; everything (except helium) is recoverable with sufficient energy expenditure, and in comparison to the lithosphere, humans are small, ephemeral, and fragile, and particularly susceptible to diseases due to their social nature.

Optimism and pessimism are useless as guides to truth, and facts imply that both are warranted - and each topic likely warrants a different level of optimism.

If you seek to apply a single level of optimism or pessimism to every subject, you will be badly wrong about a number of things.

This is the google dashboard about Covid-19 about Sweden and so on.

The cases show up first, you can toggle to deaths. a few hundred people testing positive a day and 0-4 people dying. The past week even lower.

you were talking about a 4% fatality rate - shaded by you to be infection fatality rate, not symptomatic fatality rate or hospitalization fatality rate.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

With decent mask behavior it's enough.



I think his death numbers are on the high side, the fatality rate appears to be under 1%. However, there's a reason that I've been saying Trump 2020k.

According to Worldometers, the Case Fatality Rate worldwide is about 4% (of around 28 million resolved cases), and the CFR in the USA is also about 4% (of just over 5 million resolved cases).

Yes, but Loren is probably talking about the infection fatality ratio, (IFR), of which, the Case Fatality Rate (CFR) will always be an upper bound. And given the amount of infections that go unnoticed, it is likely significantly different, 1% IFR being very realistic (maybe even too high).

Yup, IFR is what really matters. We have seen 1% in parts of Italy but that involved a crashed healthcare system.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I read an article about a month ago, either online or in a print source (I can’t remember where) that used the method of comparing death rates from 2020 with previous years to determine if there were a large number of “excess deaths,” not attributed to Covid-19, but which would give an indication of increased mortality nevertheless due to Covid, if that makes sense. I may not be expressing the idea too clearly. Deaths caused by Covid that were assumed to be by natural or other causes. In other words, the article I read concluded, there could be a much higher mortality rate than reported.

This website from the CDC gives a very detailed explanation and a ton of data. I am not trained in statistics and so can express no informed opinion, but I wonder what others here have to say.

View attachment 29690

Yup. Given the poor measurement of Covid this is the best measure we have--and it says that for the US we are at least 20% low in recording Covid deaths. The Republican head-in-sand approach can reduce "Covid" deaths, it can't reduce the total deaths.

 

[repoman]

darnit,

I did not link the google covid dashboard

https://www.google.com/search?channel=fs&client=ubuntu&q=sweden+coronavirus+

 

[repoman]

Some army people want to make social distancing permanent?

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2020/10/14/us-army-wants-industry-to-keep-covid-safety-rules-in-place-even-after-the-pandemic-ends/

 

[Worldtraveller]

I read an article about a month ago, either online or in a print source (I can’t remember where) that used the method of comparing death rates from 2020 with previous years to determine if there were a large number of “excess deaths,” not attributed to Covid-19, but which would give an indication of increased mortality nevertheless due to Covid, if that makes sense. I may not be expressing the idea too clearly. Deaths caused by Covid that were assumed to be by natural or other causes. In other words, the article I read concluded, there could be a much higher mortality rate than reported.

This website from the CDC gives a very detailed explanation and a ton of data. I am not trained in statistics and so can express no informed opinion, but I wonder what others here have to say.

View attachment 29690

Yup. Given the poor measurement of Covid this is the best measure we have--and it says that for the US we are at least 20% low in recording Covid deaths. The Republican head-in-sand approach can reduce "Covid" deaths, it can't reduce the total deaths.

It's not head in sand. It's obfuscation. aka deliberate and willful lying.

Glad I could help.

 

[Treedbear]

White House: Tennessee mask mandate ‘must be implemented’

by: JONATHAN MATTISE, Associated Press, Posted: Oct 16, 2020

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — The White House quietly told Tennessee early this week that “a statewide mask mandate must be implemented” to curb its growing spread of COVID-19, strong instructions that the White House and governor did not discuss publicly before the report emerged in a records request.