i don't think you can conclude that because daily deaths in homes have gone up that they are due to the China Virus. I mean presumably everyone is spending all of their time at home- so location of deaths would be there. In addition - we know that mental health is taking a toll.joshpettett said:
Unfortunately the death test isn't that simple either. Last I saw New York believes their daily reported COVID deaths are about 150-200 less than actual deaths. They used to test the dead they found in their homes after the fact, but have stopped that due to shortages.
Daily Charts
607,555 Views |
2786 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by AggieUSMC
Carnwellag2 said:i don't think you can conclude that because daily deaths in homes have gone up that they are due to the China Virus. I mean presumably everyone is spending all of their time at home- so location of deaths would be there. In addition - we know that mental health is taking a toll.joshpettett said:
Unfortunately the death test isn't that simple either. Last I saw New York believes their daily reported COVID deaths are about 150-200 less than actual deaths. They used to test the dead they found in their homes after the fact, but have stopped that due to shortages.
Agreed. Dr Fauci and Birx were asked about this today and said they suspect they are actually over counting not under counting in the sense that if you test positive for covid and die, they are saying it was covid irregardless.
But certainly with everyone at home and stress levels high, more deaths are occurring there than otherwise.
Lets not forget that we have the example of the lady from New Orleans who died in her house and it was assumed it was covid, only to find out it wasn't after death.
Just got a reply - they are swapping /testing, and of it comes back positive and there is no other cause for question they are not performing an autopsy
So not perfect, but minimal risk of a lot of falsely attributed deaths. No idea if they are being counted in the covid deaths but I suspect they are
So not perfect, but minimal risk of a lot of falsely attributed deaths. No idea if they are being counted in the covid deaths but I suspect they are
Shot in the head while being hit by a car and had covid? Died of covid.
In any population larger than "a couple" you're going to have errors creep into the data. We're looking at a lot of people dying, most earlier than they would have otherwise.
Percentages of being right sort of loses it's meaning when talking about human life.
Percentages of being right sort of loses it's meaning when talking about human life.
I didn't know we had 12,000 people get shot and hit by a car simultaneously in the last month!
I could be anything. Heart attack but test positive for covid? Died of covid. Aneurysm? Died of covid.
That's a lot of people getting covid
AvidAggie said:
That's a lot of people getting covid
Let it go. Jet black had convinced me; if we can't have 100% accurate data, we shouldnt bother with any data.
Jeffry Epstein did not kill himself. He had COVID.
The Venn diagram overlap of ridiculous posts by a poster and poster posts the majority of time on the "politics" board is impressive
The US deaths today was quite high, in line with predictions, but I hope that reverses quickly. Is there a good site with reliable info on PENDING tests? Meaning tests administered but no results yet entered?
I wonder if we can turn the new positives around, then the deaths, and start talking in earnest about just how we can get things moving again as far as lifting restrictions and returned to our normal lives - or close to it.
The US deaths today was quite high, in line with predictions, but I hope that reverses quickly. Is there a good site with reliable info on PENDING tests? Meaning tests administered but no results yet entered?
I wonder if we can turn the new positives around, then the deaths, and start talking in earnest about just how we can get things moving again as far as lifting restrictions and returned to our normal lives - or close to it.
Reliable data would require identifying COVID as a primary cause of death or at least contributing. It would also require these "delayed" results to be backdated so you could better correlate to observed hospitalizations, ICU and deaths.
So let's take Harris County today reporting what 200 "new" cases. But if those test were conducted on average 1 week ago or maybe more you should already being seeing the hospitalizations for those positives.
You also have to separate out negative tests of frontline works tested preemptively or be caused they coughed on their shift or showed up with a fever. Tests that would not be given to the average Joe.
Then you have to get a true handle on asymptotic cases, true identification of recoveries, etc.
So the data and modeling right now is so unreliable to the point of being useless other than guiding some SWAG that says we do not know enough to give an all clear, and for the safety of humans we need to slow the spread through April 30. I don't disagree with that but I would also love to see things get moving. Predicting deaths off the current data set is completely asinine.
So let's take Harris County today reporting what 200 "new" cases. But if those test were conducted on average 1 week ago or maybe more you should already being seeing the hospitalizations for those positives.
You also have to separate out negative tests of frontline works tested preemptively or be caused they coughed on their shift or showed up with a fever. Tests that would not be given to the average Joe.
Then you have to get a true handle on asymptotic cases, true identification of recoveries, etc.
So the data and modeling right now is so unreliable to the point of being useless other than guiding some SWAG that says we do not know enough to give an all clear, and for the safety of humans we need to slow the spread through April 30. I don't disagree with that but I would also love to see things get moving. Predicting deaths off the current data set is completely asinine.
US Death story not as happy as yesterday. Hopefully today was just a blip. Even still, instead of being a day ahead in deaths, we are a now a day behind.
April 30 is looking less and less likely. US cases were back up today. Lots of states haven't even peaked, let alone got near zero. Right now, subject to large swings of change of course, the Covid predictions modeling site still has around a thousand deaths a day in May 1. Highly unlikely we open back up at that level.
yes the data is flawed, trendline can still be valid if the flaws in the data are consistent. Infection data flaws are not consistent that number is garbagw.
# of deaths also flawed but in more consistent way so the trend in deaths is more accurate and really a bad sign it is similar to precision and accuracy
# of deaths also flawed but in more consistent way so the trend in deaths is more accurate and really a bad sign it is similar to precision and accuracy
Sq 17 said:
yes the data is flawed, trendline can still be valid if the flaws in the data are consistent. Infection data flaws are not consistent that number is garbagw.
# of deaths also flawed but in more consistent way so the trend in deaths is more accurate and really a bad sign it is similar to precision and accuracy
I think, with the lag in deaths, we will know in another 5-6 days if the trend in deaths is really bad or not.
How hard is it to just show an actual updated line based on the date the test was taken? You know, a revised line? Not that hard...
Do you really believe that any of us are jubilant in this personal and economic tragedy? None of us are happy about this situation. This could have been handled so much better than it has been.flown-the-coop said:
This is my last post, let the virus champions rejoice. Were cases reported today adjusted for date of test, just asking cause it's sort of important. You know, predictive modeling and math.
"Got eleventy thousand positive results today as several testing facilities decided to send in backlog of reporting data. Predict worse day ever 11.34489 days from now."
Garbage data in, garbage data out. Daily charts based on what data!
flown-the-coop said:
This is my last post, let the virus champions rejoice. Were cases reported today adjusted for date of test, just asking cause it's sort of important. You know, predictive modeling and math.
"Got eleventy thousand positive results today as several testing facilities decided to send in backlog of reporting data. Predict worse day ever 11.34489 days from now."
Garbage data in, garbage data out. Daily charts based on what data!
Take it to forum 16 with the rest of the deniers.
Do we know for a fact that the test date was not kept as part of the data dump? There are, what, at least five dates to keep track of: Test date, possible infection date, lab receive date, lab process date, reporting date. etc. Does this quote indicate that these dates are not being accounted for and that the reporting date is then assumed to be equal to the test date or possible infection date?flown-the-coop said:
"Got eleventy thousand positive results today as several testing facilities decided to send in backlog of reporting data. Predict worse day ever 11.34489 days from now."
Garbage data in, garbage data out. Daily charts based on what data!
Maybe I haven't read enough on the data being reported and I may be nieve, but I would assume anyone looking at the data would keep these dates separate and not conflate them and be able to change the charts accordingly.
nvm
Looks like heathdata.org downgraded their death projections again. It's at 60,415 now. It was at 82,000 on Monday and 90,000 last week.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
With a range of 31k-126k.SirLurksALot said:
Looks like heathdata.org downgraded their death projections again. It's at 60,415 now. It was at 82,000 on Monday and 90,000 last week.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
If 60k is the number, I'd probably take the under.
aginlakeway said:With a range of 31k-126k.SirLurksALot said:
Looks like heathdata.org downgraded their death projections again. It's at 60,415 now. It was at 82,000 on Monday and 90,000 last week.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
If 60k is the number, I'd probably take the under.
They've had up and down ranges since the beginning. The first time I saw it a few weeks ago the prediction was around 92,000, but had a range of between 50,000 to 200,000. Since then they have only downgraded the projections. We'll see if they end up downgrading again.
updated
EDIT: Not worth the derail.
SirLurksALot said:
Looks like heathdata.org downgraded their death projections again. It's at 60,415 now. It was at 82,000 on Monday and 90,000 last week.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
Probably just the first wave of deaths. IMO.
BlackGoldAg2011 said:
updated
Dude you the man, you and Phillip J Fry both. Much appreciated
This. Hard to trust any of these numbers. Especially the mortality rate.Quote:
Garbage data in, garbage data out.
Going with what we have, I doubt we hit 50k deaths.
Also don't see anyway we are shutdown past April 30th.
Jet Black said:This. Hard to trust any of these numbers.Quote:
Garbage data in, garbage data out.
Says the person that posted links of fake news all over from One America News?
It's interesting that the US CFR plot is trending concave upward still. I wonder if/when we'll see that inflect and stabilize.
RE: Covid19 timelines...
the answer is always "in 2 weeks"!
the answer is always "in 2 weeks"!
questioning the validity of input data into a model is a perfectly reasonable exercise and an important step to any modeling. However, if any of y'all throwing stones at the modeling and data can't support your doubts with real evidence, please keep your opinions to yourself, or at very least out of a thread dedicated to models, plots, and data. (and no, a news article sharing your doubts but not backing those doubts up with facts and evidence is not evidence regardless of how reputable of a source it might be)Jet Black said:This. Hard to trust any of these numbers. Especially the mortality rate.Quote:
Garbage data in, garbage data out.
Going with what we have, I doubt we hit 50k deaths.
Also don't see anyway we are shutdown past April 30th.
Featured Stories
See All
21:36
13h ago
1.7k
No. 13 Aggies dispatch East Texas A&M in Friday's home opener, 87-55
by Olin Buchanan
54:36
22h ago
5.0k
47:49
23h ago
2.2k
5 Thoughts: No. 13 Texas A&M 87, East Texas A&M 55
by Luke Evangelist
99:23
20h ago
1.5k