Why Do We Have Data Problem?

4,024 Views | 114 Replies | Last: 2 mo ago by Wife of Chas Satterfield
Joe Exotic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
30wedge said:

Bo Darville said:

Rendered Fat said:

It wouldn't matter anyway. Bo Darville, InfectionAg and P.C. Principal are the only ones who understand basic math.


There's a few others, but sadly not many.


We also don't want to kill hundreds of thousands to save your 401k.
Guess you don't have a 401(k)


I do. I also have a moral compass and a soul.
Wife of Chas Satterfield
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Troutslime said:

Philip J Fry said:

Rendered Fat said:

It wouldn't matter anyway. Bo Darville, InfectionAg and P.C. Principal are the only ones who understand basic math.
Such a stupid statement. You guys understand the math. You just disagree with it because it's a scary outcome.


And you put blind faith into corrupt analytics.

He is doing a good job of keeping track.

It will be what it will be.
FrioAg 00
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You're NY data linked shows cases, not mortality. No one is arguing that you don't get it if younger - the difference is in your reaction to it

Icecream_Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
FrioAg 00 said:

You're NY data linked shows cases, not mortality. No one is arguing that you don't get it if younger - the difference is in your reaction to it


second chart is deaths. 50 out of 13575 younger than 60. The percentages on the charts is how much of the whole they make up

He also added the percentages from China to get his 2.3%
Agnzona
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You realize your a **** for claiming that people with legit differences of opinion are cold, and callous and your altruistic?
OverSeas AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
k2aggie07 said:

Ya, I'd put myself as 2.5. Or 3 today 2 tomorrow. Haha!

I do not think ANYONE thought it was going to be as bad as it is a month ag, certainly not 6 weeks ago.

I do think that some people tried to take advantage of the disruption and fear, but I am not sure they understood how bad this is going to be.

I think that the media gets paid on clicks and have created an environment of click-bait as much as possible. See "BREAKING NEWS" on any news channel, when the news they are breaking is not remotely breaking news. So they have reported anything that they can, helping to create the hysteria we see today. Additionally, what good information could they get all at once? None... so it is not their fault alone.

I think the information providers (politicians and medical professionals) have been trying give good information, but have not always been on the same page and do not have the same understanding... and where there is a lack of information, people fill it, but not always in the best possible way. You also have scientists/doctors who are very precisely speaking about the same things as the politicians, who are often executive, big-picture minded and are not precise at all.

I think that many didn't want to see the reality of so much disruption to their lives... and as humans beings are... initially were angry about the loss of sports and conventions, then concerned about 401(k)s, and now fearful for jobs, homes, debt. And maybe even getting scared about their health finally.

Here we are still trying to figure out the true cost of this in both economics and health, watching things get locked down, and getting panic fatigue and frustration.

IT is a lot for people to comprehend with and cope with.

I have laid out the above and seen this evolution coming, yet there are days where I am Mr. Snappy Overseas Ag.

TLDR Crowd: lots of opaqueness couple with panic is making this situation even worse.
Joe Exotic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This "difference of opinion" means killing hundreds of thousands of people so someone can have a bigger Winnebago with the extra slide out when they retire.
k2aggie07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sampling the NYT and WSJ editorials is a pretty good indication of the confusion this is calling. Week to week you have editorials saying we over-reacted, we under-reacted, we mis-reacted, the economy is going to die, the virus is worse, round and round.
Philip J Fry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Icecream_Ag said:

FrioAg 00 said:

You're NY data linked shows cases, not mortality. No one is arguing that you don't get it if younger - the difference is in your reaction to it


second chart is deaths. 50 out of 13575 younger than 60. The percentages on the charts is how much of the whole they make up

He also added the percentages from China to get his 2.3%
Considering the NY has close to 4000 in hospital beds right now and 80% of those that go on the ventilator end up dying, I'm not going to pound my chest at the 13575 number. Fact is 14-64 make up 25% of the death toll.
k2aggie07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/new-blood-tests-antibodies-could-show-true-scale-coronavirus-pandemic

This should help the data problem. We'll have better information soon.
OverSeas AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bo Darville said:

This "difference of opinion" means killing hundreds of thousands of people so someone can have a bigger Winnebago with the extra slide out when they retire.
mr moral compass and soul, you are making HUGE assumptions about folks.

If you REALLY think all they care about is their "winnebago" or "killing the elderly" (as you said yesterday) then you are highly judgmental and self-righteous.

I would like to think you are truly compassionate, but the more you post, the more I am doubting it.
Canyon99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agnzona said:

Bo Darville said:

Rendered Fat said:

It wouldn't matter anyway. Bo Darville, InfectionAg and P.C. Principal are the only ones who understand basic math.


There's a few others, but sadly not many.


We also don't want to kill hundreds of thousands to save your 401k.
A better question is why don't you care about the unintended consequence deaths that will occur and why don't you care about all the everyday deaths? Why is this so much more important to you than the other deaths?


More free time to play with model trains?
Joe Exotic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Have you read the posts from those that say killing 500,000 is a okay as long as their business or retirement survives? I have. I saw the blue stars they got.

Did you object to them?
Wife of Chas Satterfield
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Philip J Fry said:

Icecream_Ag said:

FrioAg 00 said:

You're NY data linked shows cases, not mortality. No one is arguing that you don't get it if younger - the difference is in your reaction to it


second chart is deaths. 50 out of 13575 younger than 60. The percentages on the charts is how much of the whole they make up

He also added the percentages from China to get his 2.3%
Considering the NY has close to 4000 in hospital beds right now and 80% of those that go on the ventilator end up dying, I'm not going to pound my chest at the 13575 number. Fact is 14-64 make up 25% of the death toll.
I don't see a death breakdown by age group for NY. What link shows this?
OverSeas AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bo Darville said:

Have you read the posts from those that say killing 500,000 is a okay as long as their business or retirement survives? I have. I saw the blue stars they got.

Did you object to them?
I have not seen them frankly.

And no I do not want anyone to die. But I am again going to repeat, a healthy society is far more than physical health. I will admit that there are some that do not want any disruption whatsoever to their life style... and it pure and simple greed. If that is where you are coming from, my apologies and you are right about that. If greed is all their motivated about, they are wrong.

But we must balance our response to protect both those at the most health risk and those at the most economic risk. And the people that fall in the middle are going to have to make some sacrifices, but to completely sacrifice them is, in my opinion not viable.

It is a fine line to walk.
Troutslime
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bo Darville said:

This "difference of opinion" means killing hundreds of thousands of people so someone can have a bigger Winnebago with the extra slide out when they retire.


My opinions and beliefs don't kill anyone, and I don't want anyone to die. Using your straw man arguments is getting tiresome.
Joe Exotic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
OverSeas AG said:

Bo Darville said:

Have you read the posts from those that say killing 500,000 is a okay as long as their business or retirement survives? I have. I saw the blue stars they got.

Did you object to them?
I have not seen them frankly.

And no I do not want anyone to die. But I am again going to repeat, a healthy society is far more than physical health. I will admit that there are some that do not want any disruption whatsoever to their life style... and it pure and simple greed. If that is where you are coming from, my apologies and you are right about that. If greed is all their motivated about, they are wrong.

But we must balance our response to protect both those at the most health risk and those at the most economic risk. And the people that fall in the middle are going to have to make some sacrifices, but to completely sacrifice them is, in my opinion not viable.

It is a fine line to walk.


We are probably in agreement in the big picture. I supporter a 2 to 3 week shutdown as Trump wanted, in order to prepare healthcare and save many. But eventually we will need to move forward to avoid other significant harm, both with health and economy.

And there are some who believe this is just the flu and no significant life saved is worth their finances, which borders on pure evil.
Icecream_Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
Wife of Chas Satterfield said:

Philip J Fry said:

Icecream_Ag said:

FrioAg 00 said:

You're NY data linked shows cases, not mortality. No one is arguing that you don't get it if younger - the difference is in your reaction to it


second chart is deaths. 50 out of 13575 younger than 60. The percentages on the charts is how much of the whole they make up

He also added the percentages from China to get his 2.3%
Considering the NY has close to 4000 in hospital beds right now and 80% of those that go on the ventilator end up dying, I'm not going to pound my chest at the 13575 number. Fact is 14-64 make up 25% of the death toll.
I don't see a death breakdown by age group for NY. What link shows this?
it's not worth it. He's dead set on 450 million peoe in NYC are gonna die if we don't lock everyone in their homes, and nothing will change his mind
Agnzona
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bo Darville said:

This "difference of opinion" means killing hundreds of thousands of people so someone can have a bigger Winnebago with the extra slide out when they retire.
You are being obscene, the difference is killing 1x or 1.x and destroying the country politically and economically for that .x % when you don't give a crap about ten times that or a thousand times that deaths from other things even this cure!
Joe Exotic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Read my following post. There were posters who said precisely what I called out. You aren't one of them.
Philip J Fry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wife of Chas Satterfield said:

Philip J Fry said:

Icecream_Ag said:

FrioAg 00 said:

You're NY data linked shows cases, not mortality. No one is arguing that you don't get it if younger - the difference is in your reaction to it


second chart is deaths. 50 out of 13575 younger than 60. The percentages on the charts is how much of the whole they make up

He also added the percentages from China to get his 2.3%
Considering the NY has close to 4000 in hospital beds right now and 80% of those that go on the ventilator end up dying, I'm not going to pound my chest at the 13575 number. Fact is 14-64 make up 25% of the death toll.
I don't see a death breakdown by age group for NY. What link shows this?


It's on the second page
Philip J Fry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Icecream_Ag said:

Wife of Chas Satterfield said:

Philip J Fry said:

Icecream_Ag said:

FrioAg 00 said:

You're NY data linked shows cases, not mortality. No one is arguing that you don't get it if younger - the difference is in your reaction to it


second chart is deaths. 50 out of 13575 younger than 60. The percentages on the charts is how much of the whole they make up

He also added the percentages from China to get his 2.3%
Considering the NY has close to 4000 in hospital beds right now and 80% of those that go on the ventilator end up dying, I'm not going to pound my chest at the 13575 number. Fact is 14-64 make up 25% of the death toll.
I don't see a death breakdown by age group for NY. What link shows this?
it's not worth it. He's dead set on 450 million peoe in NYC are gonna die if we don't lock everyone in their homes, and nothing will change his mind


I would appreciate it if you not put words in my mouth. Especially when I've never claimed anything near that number. You're only off by a factor of 1000 or so.
OverSeas AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bo Darville said:

OverSeas AG said:

Bo Darville said:

Have you read the posts from those that say killing 500,000 is a okay as long as their business or retirement survives? I have. I saw the blue stars they got.

Did you object to them?
I have not seen them frankly.

And no I do not want anyone to die. But I am again going to repeat, a healthy society is far more than physical health. I will admit that there are some that do not want any disruption whatsoever to their life style... and it pure and simple greed. If that is where you are coming from, my apologies and you are right about that. If greed is all their motivated about, they are wrong.

But we must balance our response to protect both those at the most health risk and those at the most economic risk. And the people that fall in the middle are going to have to make some sacrifices, but to completely sacrifice them is, in my opinion not viable.

It is a fine line to walk.


We are probably in agreement in the big picture. I supporter a 2 to 3 week shutdown as Trump wanted, in order to prepare healthcare and save many. But eventually we will need to move forward to avoid other significant harm, both with health and economy.

And there are some who believe this is just the flu and no significant life saved is worth their finances, which borders on pure evil.
yes head in the ground is not remotely helpful.
Wife of Chas Satterfield
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I apologize I don't see it in the link below.

Second page is a graph of positive cases. Looks like daily cases. I guess the number at the top of the pink bar is total number of cases and red bar are critical cases.

Deaths are 199 at the bottom of table on page 1.

https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-daily-data-summary.pdf
Philip J Fry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Looks like they removed it. They might be updating as there was an additional table before the chart.
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm surprised how strong some opions are here given that we don't have the true denominator...

Count me in the "i dont know" crowd on severity, contagiousness, and what's the right approach.

I don't belong to the "we must do everything if it'll just save one life!" crowd, but I also want to avoid Americans dying because medical infrastructure ais collapsing.

I don't know. And neither will anyone else until we get an idea how widespread this thing actually is.

Glass half full take: the higher the denominator (lots of asymptomatic cases) the lower the severity, and the smaller the denominator the less prolific it is.
eric76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Without widespread testing to determine accurate numbers it is little better than a guess.
eric76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Because influenza and covid-19 are not the same disease.
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agnzona said:

Why don't we have good data? Why can't we run real solid models?

By now we should have a very solid death rate and should be able to extrapolate, deaths based on our actions. i.e. shelter in place, work with social distancing, complete return to normal activity???


This is strictly anecdotal but I've been told by a few nurses I know in Houston, Austin, and San Antonio that to this point they are witnessing deaths occurring prior to testing that appear consistent with other COVID deaths but that due to supply shortages they've not been tested so as to conserve resources for those who are hospitalized in time to prevent potential death.

If that is In fact the case then I'd expect to see an unusual spike in death rate compared to normal that doesn't appear to correlate to confirmed COVID Dx. I don't know what the lead time is for availability of those statistics from the state but I imagine it's sufficiently protracted so as to only be useful in retrospect.
Agnzona
How long do you want to ignore this user?
eric76 said:

Because influenza and covid-19 are not the same disease.
I understand that, but what we are missing here is context and the flu gives us great context because we get it every year and have over a hundred years of data! Having correct context is paramount to developing any policy.

We can't just keep saying OMG 10 died, 100 Died, 1000 died, 10,000 died without context!
FrioAg 00
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

your math is so wrong I don't know where to start. Even in NY it's 0.36% for people under 60, nowhere near your 2.3%


There are about 4 posters who can't understand math and are still running around telling everyone else they don't understand math.

It's the AOC of TexAgs "we'll just pay for it, that's how we'll afford it"
Mordred
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Get Off My Lawn said:

I'm surprised how strong some opions are here given that we don't have the true denominator...

Count me in the "i dont know" crowd on severity, contagiousness, and what's the right approach.

I don't belong to the "we must do everything if it'll just save one life!" crowd, but I also want to avoid Americans dying because medical infrastructure ais collapsing.

I don't know. And neither will anyone else until we get an idea how widespread this thing actually is.

Glass half full take: the higher the denominator (lots of asymptomatic cases) the lower the severity, and the smaller the denominator the less prolific it is.
Obviously pretty much everybody hopes the denominator is a lot higher, the issue is that even BEST case, we'd be at what 10-20% of the population having this? Hospitals are already at capacity in some parts of the country. We still have a serious problem, even if the true CFR is a lot lower.... it just might only get 3-6x worse than it currently is, before getting better.
Wife of Chas Satterfield
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wait our annual flu season is driven by viruses? Or is it not?
Mordred
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Philip J Fry said:


Whatever makes you feel better. Those under 60 have a death rate of 2.3% This notion that only the old die from this is flat out false.

I think you added all the CFRs for everyone under the age of 60, since that totals 2.3%. You should add then divide by # of age ranges (5) to get 0.46% as average CFR for those under 60.
FPS_Dough
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Its not about what I feel its about the numbers good lord.
Page 3 of 4
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.