Formerly DT: COVID-19 - Featuring Lots of Politics, now CR because political talk not going away

[Pato del Muerto 52487]

27 minutes ago, Bevo said:

The BLM protests and riots have been going on for months and have their own partying associated with them. And more importantly, the BLM protests have been much larger and much more widespread across the country. I would venture to guess that the size and number of people involved in the BLM protests and riots are on the order of 1000X larger than the sturgis event. So as a long answer to your short question, I think it is pretty obvious that the BLM protests would lead to a large number of cases spread across most of the US.

Hmmm. 200,000 x 1000 = 200,000,000

so you think 2/3 of the country has participated in the protests?

[dcar00 14158]

2 minutes ago, Chopper said:

There was an excellent article back when the pandemic first started by an emergency room physician delving into the CDC flu death estimates. I tried to relocate it but haven't been successful so far. It concluded the actual number of flu deaths on an annual basis is around 3k per year and that you'd be hard-pressed to find a doctor who says they've ever had a patient who died from flu. The reason the CDC gives the flu death estimate is, in their own words,

It's a shock number to emphasize the importance for people to take active precautions to avoid spreading it.

right they tend to die of pneumonia, a complication of the flu, especially in older folks.  yep, they've been lying to us for years on the amount of flu deaths.

[Bevo 13569]

4 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Hmmm. 200,000 x 1000 = 200,000,000

so you think 2/3 of the country has participated in the protests?

Nah, I think 30-40 million different people have participated in the protests and riots but most have participated multiple times.  So it depends on whether we are talking about different individuals or absolute numbers of attendees. 

[Chopper 17230]

On comparing flu deaths to covid 19 deaths, by a Harvard ER physician

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/02/theres-more-accurate-way-compare-coronavirus-deaths-flu/

Quote

To get a more accurate comparison, one must start with the number of directly confirmed flu deaths, which the CDC tracks on an annual basis. In the past seven flu seasons, going back to 2013, that tally fluctuated between 3,448 and 15,620 deaths.

 

7 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Nonsensical ? Did you really type that ?

Too many syllables for you?

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, Chopper said:

On comparing flu deaths to covid 19 deaths, by a Harvard ER physician

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/02/theres-more-accurate-way-compare-coronavirus-deaths-flu/

 

Too many syllables for you?

Too many syllables ?  No, too much irony from you.

[Chopper 17230]

1 minute ago, Bevo said:

Nah, I think 30-40 million different people have participated in the protests and riots but most have participated multiple times.  So it depends on whether we are talking about different individuals or absolute numbers of attendees. 

There was a huge number of differences between the two. The fact that you can't grasp that is what makes your tiresome, ignorant word vomits so nonsensical.

[Chopper 17230]

11 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

right they tend to die of pneumonia, a complication of the flu, especially in older folks.  yep, they've been lying to us for years on the amount of flu deaths.

Not all people who come down with pneumonia get it from the flu. In fact, flu isn't even the leading cause of pneumonia. And to call it lying incorrectly implies a negative motivation, and misunderstands modeling and science. 

[Trey3216 15345]

25 minutes ago, Chopper said:

On comparing flu deaths to covid 19 deaths, by a Harvard ER physician

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/02/theres-more-accurate-way-compare-coronavirus-deaths-flu/

 

Too many syllables for you?

So now directly attributed flu deaths is a measure and directly attributed COVID deaths is not?  It only matters for COVID?  Jeez  

 

How many juggling monkeys jumproping in a hoop do we need?  

[Bevo 13569]

20 minutes ago, Chopper said:

There was a huge number of differences between the two. The fact that you can't grasp that is what makes your tiresome, ignorant word vomits so nonsensical.

The differences and similarities were acknowledged and addressed. 

[dcar00 14158]

21 minutes ago, Chopper said:

On comparing flu deaths to covid 19 deaths, by a Harvard ER physician

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/02/theres-more-accurate-way-compare-coronavirus-deaths-flu/

 

Too many syllables for you?

right, then they estimate it is much higher anywhere from 5x to 10x and that is the number they report as the estimate without reporting the actual.  they do the same thing with flu cases by the way.  did the same thing with Swine Flu as well and did it with cases, hospitalizations and deaths using very wide variances.

[dcar00 14158]

8 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Not all people who come down with pneumonia get it from the flu. In fact, flu isn't even the leading cause of pneumonia. And to call it lying incorrectly implies a negative motivation, and misunderstands modeling and science. 

agree there is a difference bewteen viral and bacterial pneumonia is one most common causes of viral pneumonia.

Edit bacterial pneumonia not flu

Edited September 8, 2020 by dcar00

[Incredulity 11655]

6 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

So now directly attributed flu deaths is a measure and directly attributed COVID deaths is not?  It only matters for COVID?  Jeez  

 

How many juggling monkeys jumproping in a hoop do we need?  

[BradInATX 9208]

Literally almost 300,000 excess deaths in our country (all causes) since March and some of you dumb mother fuckers are still beating the "it's no worse than the flu" drum. God damn it's embarrassing that we have this mouth breathing nonsense on a message board associated with the university.

[dcar00 14158]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

Literally almost 300,000 excess deaths in our country (all causes) since March and some of you dumb mother fuckers are still beating the "it's no worse than the flu" drum. God damn it's embarrassing that we have this mouth breathing nonsense on a message board associated with the university.

who is saying it is no worse than flu?

[Chopper 17230]

9 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

right, then they estimate it is much higher anywhere from 5x to 10x and that is the number they report as the estimate without reporting the actual.  they do the same thing with flu cases by the way.  did the same thing with Swine Flu as well and did it with cases, hospitalizations and deaths using very wide variances.

They do report actual number of flu deaths, by the way.

As for Covid-19 tests there wasn't even a test for it up until several weeks ago, and different states test and report it in different ways. The official numbers are severely under-stated.

[BradInATX 9208]

 

1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

who is saying it is no worse than flu?

 

I literally just scrolled through the last two pages as fast as my browser would let me once I saw who was posting and the general content (flu numbers, pneumonia, etc.) so I don't really know what you people are talking about, but I can see we're back on the whole "the numbers are juiced" nonsense. There is no way to juice the excess deaths number.  The CDC estimate is ~200k on the low end and north of 350k on the high end. That's roughly how many people have died from Covid that would not have died otherwise. It's not complicated, at least for most people.

[dcar00 14158]

Just now, BradInATX said:

 

 

I literally just scrolled through the last two pages as fast as my browser would let me once I saw who was posting and the general content (flu numbers, pneumonia, etc.) so I don't really know what you people are talking about, but I can see we're back on the whole "the numbers are juiced" nonsense. There is no way to juice the excess deaths number.  The CDC estimate is ~200k on the low end and north of 350k on the high end. That's roughly how many people have died from Covid that would not have died otherwise. It's not complicated, at least for most people.

there is no way to know they would not have died otherwise had they not had covid.  certainly many of them would not have died were it not for covid.  total deaths per year certainly is an indicator you would look at.  I think we were talking about how the CDC estimates things in regards to a virus and IMO, they have these wide ass ranges that are used to calculate things which give an outsized view of a situation. 

[BradInATX 9208]

2 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

there is no way to know they would not have died otherwise had they not had covid.  certainly many of them would not have died were it not for covid.  total deaths per year certainly is an indicator you would look at.  I think we were talking about how the CDC estimates things in regards to a virus and IMO, they have these wide ass ranges that are used to calculate things which give an outsized view of a situation. 

Between 200,000 and 350,000 more people have died this year than expected. I can explain it to you, but I can't help you to understand. It's not a complex concept. 

Edited September 8, 2020 by BradInATX

[atomheartbevo 89629]

1 hour ago, Chopper said:

The same researchers studied both the drumpf oklahoma rally and the BLM protests in separate studies and concluded that neither drove an uptick in covid cases for a variety of reasons so it seems unfair to claim bias.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w27408 blm protests

https://www.nber.org/papers/w27522 sparsely attended political rally in OK

We should get Herman Cain’s take on the OK rally.

Not saying I don’t disagree overall.   

Edited September 8, 2020 by atomheartbevo

[BradInATX 9208]

Thought this was pretty interesting. @BrazilHorn posted a piece of this over on the football board, but I thought this was pretty interesting from a Kaiser Permanente study. The "risk ratio" is just how much more likely that group is to die from Covid, so someone >80 years old is 43.21 times more likely to die of it than someone 0-40 ("reference")

Some of the most interesting ones for me are the "smoker" cohort which is actually less likely to die than former smokers or even never smokers. I know there was some other anecdotal evidence of this in other places. It's also interesting that when you control for other covariates, race isn't really a big mover of the needle. I know early on the New Orleans black community was hit really hard, and so was our hispanic population in Texas. It looks like that was more due to other risk factors, not race in a vaccum.

The time-based risk at the very bottom also lends credence to the weakening impact of Covid. Whether or not that's because of summer, better treatment, a legitimately weakning virus, or some combination thereof, the danger of the virus is 1/3 of what it was in the beginning. 

Anyway, interesting stuff. No real point I'm making, just thought some of you guys would be interested in it.

The smoking thing is really bizarre.

 

[Trey3216 15345]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

Thought this was pretty interesting. @BrazilHorn posted a piece of this over on the football board, but I thought this was pretty interesting from a Kaiser Permanente study. The "risk ratio" is just how much more likely that group is to die from Covid, so someone >80 years old is 43.21 times more likely to die of it than someone 0-40 ("reference")

Some of the most interesting ones for me are the "smoker" cohort which is actually less likely to die than former smokers or even never smokers. I know there was some other anecdotal evidence of this in other places. It's also interesting that when you control for other covariates, race isn't really a big mover of the needle. I know early on the New Orleans black community was hit really hard, and so was our hispanic population in Texas. It looks like that was more due to other risk factors, not race in a vaccum.

The time-based risk at the very bottom also lends credence to the weakening impact of Covid. Whether or not that's because of summer, better treatment, a legitimately weakning virus, or some combination thereof, the danger of the virus is 1/3 of what it was in the beginning. 

Anyway, interesting stuff. No real point I'm making, just thought some of you guys would be interested in it.

The smoking thing is really bizarre.

 

Congestive Heart Failure, Chronic Pulmonary, and Asthma are also fairly intriguing observations there.  

[BradInATX 9208]

1 minute ago, Trey3216 said:

Congestive Heart Failure, Chronic Pulmonary, and Asthma are also fairly intriguing observations there.  

Yeah. Keep in mind that those are controlled for the other factors (I think, I didn't deep-dive into it, I'm just farting around on a conference call). So if you are an otherwise healthy person that has heart issues, it doesn't really increase your risk. But most people with heart problems probably fall into other risks as well (BMI), so that's probably a bit misleading. I doubt there's a statistically significant group of otherwise healthy people with heart failure, but I could be wrong. I'd have to read the entire study, which I will at some point but not during a work day. Maybe @BrazilHorn has read the whole thing.

[BrazilHorn 6586]

It is definitely a cool study as it was one of the first ones I had seen that really focused on Obesity and its impact on mortality from CV19. Fairly large sample size (~7000) from Kaiser Permanente in SoCal.

End of day this thing is a stone cold killer of old people and if you are >80 and get this you are fucked.

Also if you are severely obese (40+ BMI) and <60 you have a 12-17X higher chance of dying than if you aren't.

Severe obesity is called out as the absolute leading role in mortality, especially for men <60. (versus men <60 who aren't obese)

No real difference seen based on ethnicity/income level etc.

Interesting thing as well is that there is no one other contributing factor related to obesity that is major mortality driver (hypertension, sleep apnea eg)

Rather just the fact that you are severely obese is the primary driver.

tl:dr - study says if you are younger and fat you die and if you are old regardless of being fat you die

Edited September 8, 2020 by BrazilHorn

[BradInATX 9208]

Would someone who falls into a higher BMI group but almost purely because of muscle weight vs. fat weight have the same increased risk as the average person? It's been bugging me for awhile since Von Miller reported that it kicked the shit out of him. His BMI is above 30, but he barely has an ounce of fat on him. Would he legitimately be 2x the risk? Or is it more based on fat/body fat? Maybe @ChiTownDoc or @Newdoc have a take. I'm about 30 BMI but by no means carry the fat that your average 30 BMI person does, so it's been eating at me.

Edited September 8, 2020 by BradInATX

[Bozo_Casanova 26437]

1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

 

 

I literally just scrolled through the last two pages as fast as my browser would let me once I saw who was posting and the general content (flu numbers, pneumonia, etc.) so I don't really know what you people are talking about, but I can see we're back on the whole "the numbers are juiced" nonsense. There is no way to juice the excess deaths number.  The CDC estimate is ~200k on the low end and north of 350k on the high end. That's roughly how many people have died from Covid that would not have died otherwise. It's not complicated, at least for most people.

 News flash, this thread is terrible. 

 

8 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Thought this was pretty interesting. @BrazilHorn posted a piece of this over on the football board, but I thought this was pretty interesting from a Kaiser Permanente study. The "risk ratio" is just how much more likely that group is to die from Covid, so someone >80 years old is 43.21 times more likely to die of it than someone 0-40 ("reference")

Some of the most interesting ones for me are the "smoker" cohort which is actually less likely to die than former smokers or even never smokers. I know there was some other anecdotal evidence of this in other places. It's also interesting that when you control for other covariates, race isn't really a big mover of the needle. I know early on the New Orleans black community was hit really hard, and so was our hispanic population in Texas. It looks like that was more due to other risk factors, not race in a vaccum.

The time-based risk at the very bottom also lends credence to the weakening impact of Covid. Whether or not that's because of summer, better treatment, a legitimately weakning virus, or some combination thereof, the danger of the virus is 1/3 of what it was in the beginning. 

Anyway, interesting stuff. No real point I'm making, just thought some of you guys would be interested in it.

The smoking thing is really bizarre.

 

 

9 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

Congestive Heart Failure, Chronic Pulmonary, and Asthma are also fairly intriguing observations there.  

interesting study on this topic

Quote

Conclusions This large-scale observational study suggests that smoking, measured by exposure to nicotine-replacement therapy, was associated with an increased risk of overall mortality during the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in France, although it was associated with a lower risk of severe Covid-19 in individuals without major related-smoking diseases. Experimental and clinical studies are needed to disentangle the potential mechanisms of nicotine and/or smoking in Covid-19 risk. Whatever the nature of these associations, the global impact of smoking is harmful for health even over a short epidemic period.

 

[Stannis 232]

1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

Between 200,000 and 350,000 more people have died this year than expected. I can explain it to you, but I can't help you to understand. It's not a complex concept. 

I completely agree with you.  The excess death number likely is the most accurate estimate we have of the true cost of COVID.  However, some portion of those excess deaths are indirect results of the pandemic, not directly from COVID.

For example, an elderly acquaintance of mine needed regular kidney treatments prior to the pandemic to survive (I can't recall if it was dialysis or something else).  When the pandemic began, as an elderly person with serious preexisting conditions, he was terrified of COVID, so he stopped going in for his regular treatments.  He never got COVID, but his family buried him a few weeks ago - he passed from his kidney disease after foregoing treatments due to a concern about contracting COVID.  Would he have passed this year even had he stayed on his treatment schedule?  I don't know.  But I think it is fair to assume that some portion of the excess deaths are attributable to people foregoing necessary preventative care, increased suicide, drug over-doses, and similar situations.  I'm not suggesting those indirect causes make up a majority of the excess deaths, but I suspect they make up some sizable portion.  

What a horrible year.

[ChiTownDoc 21144]

3 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Would someone who falls into a higher BMI group but almost purely because of muscle weight vs. fat weight have the same increased risk as the average person? It's been bugging me for awhile since Von Miller reported that it kicked the shit out of him. His BMI is above 30, but he barely has an ounce of fat on him. Would he legitimately be 2x the risk? Or is it more based on fat/body fat? Maybe @ChiTownDoc or @Newdoc have a take. I'm about 30 BMI but by no means carry the fat that your average 30 BMI person does, so it's been eating at me.

There’s really no direct correlation.  I’ve seen many fat people have zero issues.  Also most well built bigger guys also have few issues.  I’ve seen marathon runners hospitalized and overweight 90 yo CHF/COPD patients have zero issues.  This is a fucked up virus.  

[BradInATX 9208]

3 minutes ago, Stannis said:

I completely agree with you.  The excess death number likely is the most accurate estimate we have of the true cost of COVID.  However, some portion of those excess deaths are indirect results of the pandemic, not directly from COVID.

For example, an elderly acquaintance of mine needed regular kidney treatments prior to the pandemic to survive (I can't recall if it was dialysis or something else).  When the pandemic began, as an elderly person with serious preexisting conditions, he was terrified of COVID, so he stopped going in for his regular treatments.  He never got COVID, but his family buried him a few weeks ago - he passed from his kidney disease after foregoing treatments due to a concern about contracting COVID.  Would he have passed this year even had he stayed on his treatment schedule?  I don't know.  But I think it is fair to assume that some portion of the excess deaths are attributable to people foregoing necessary preventative care, increased suicide, drug over-doses, and similar situations.  I'm not suggesting those indirect causes make up a majority of the excess deaths, but I suspect they make up some sizable portion.  

What a horrible year.

Yeah, we talked a little bit about this upthread, or in another one, I don't remember. There are definitely people who died because of lack of hospital treatment from Covid fears or even when the operating rooms were shut down. There are also probably a nonzero amount of excess suicides. There's also the flipside of that which are things like car accidents and other accidents that happened more infrequently due to lower social activity and mobility for months. We may not know those numbers for years, but none of those things are going to move the needle by hundreds of thousands.
 

The other thing to watch will be if the excess deaths go down to below-normal levels after we find a vaccine or otherwise beat it. That would lend credence to the "the dead were going to die soon anyway" theory. I don't think we're going to see a big swing the other way that would show that, but I'm open to it being a possibility.

Edited September 8, 2020 by BradInATX

[BradInATX 9208]

3 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

There’s really no direct correlation.  I’ve seen many fat people have zero issues.  Also most well built bigger guys also have few issues.  I’ve seen marathon runners hospitalized and overweight 90 yo CHF/COPD patients have zero issues.  This is a fucked up virus.  

Check the link Brazilhorn and I are talking about a bit upthread. There's definitely a correlation. Maybe you're not seeing it in your day-to-day but when Kaiser did a controlled study of a lot of people, they found some pretty clear correlations.

Edited September 8, 2020 by BradInATX

[Stannis 232]

2 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Yeah, we talked a little bit about this upthread, or in another one, I don't remember. There are definitely people who died because of lack of hospital treatment from Covid fears or even when the operating rooms were shut down. There are also probably a nonzero amount of excess suicides. There's also the flipside of that which are things like car accidents and other accidents that happened more infrequently due to lower social activity and mobility for months. We may not know those numbers for years, but none of those things are going to move the needle by hundreds of thousands.

I'll have to try to dig up where I read this, but I think I remember reading recently that, surprisingly, deaths from automobile accidents are not down this year.  Apparently with fewer cars on the road and less congestion, people are driving more recklessly.  

[BradInATX 9208]

Just now, Stannis said:

fewer cars on the road

Username checks out

[BrazilHorn 6586]

10 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Would someone who falls into a higher BMI group but almost purely because of muscle weight vs. fat weight have the same increased risk as the average person? It's been bugging me for awhile since Von Miller reported that it kicked the shit out of him. His BMI is above 30, but he barely has an ounce of fat on him. Would he legitimately be 2x the risk? Or is it more based on fat/body fat? Maybe @ChiTownDoc or @Newdoc have a take. I'm about 30 BMI but by no means carry the fat that your average 30 BMI person does, so it's been eating at me.

I wouldn't think so as BMI technically is supposed to be a measure of the fatness within the body. So if you are >30 but with muscle vs fat you should be ok. If you are >40 BMI which is where the risks level really seem to kick up you must be a powerlifter :-). But as @ChiTownDoc said, this shit seems to hit everyone.

[Bevo 13569]

24 minutes ago, BrazilHorn said:

It is definitely a cool study as it was one of the first ones I had seen that really focused on Obesity and its impact on mortality from CV19. Fairly large sample size (~7000) from Kaiser Permanente in SoCal.

End of day this thing is a stone cold killer of old people and if you are >80 and get this you are fucked.

Also if you are severely obese (40+ BMI) and <60 you have a 12-17X higher chance of dying than if you aren't.

Severe obesity is called out as the absolute leading role in mortality, especially for men <60. (versus men <60 who aren't obese)

No real difference seen based on ethnicity/income level etc.

Interesting thing as well is that there is no one other contributing factor related to obesity that is major mortality driver (hypertension, sleep apnea eg)

Rather just the fact that you are severely obese is the primary driver.

tl:dr - study says if you are younger and fat you die and if you are old regardless of being fat you die

I was doing some work with a researcher at the Medical College of Wisconsin and the strongest correlation to heart disease and cardiac events was increase in belt size. 

[ChiTownDoc 21144]

16 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Check the link Brazilhorn and I are talking about a bit upthread. There's definitely a correlation. Maybe you're not seeing it in your day-to-day but when Kaiser did a controlled study of a lot of people, they found some pretty clear correlations.

Oh yes - but there’s correlation with blood type and outcomes too. I should say it doesn’t correlate like we see in a traditional sense that the fat guy will almost always do worse than the person in shape.  There’s a ton of data showing other correlating factors.  

[Bevo 13569]

15 minutes ago, Stannis said:

I'll have to try to dig up where I read this, but I think I remember reading recently that, surprisingly, deaths from automobile accidents are not down this year.  Apparently with fewer cars on the road and less congestion, people are driving more recklessly.  

I was driving home on 183 from Bergstrom last night going about 80mph at 10:00pm and I was passed by a motorcycle going about 120. I was also passed multiple times by trucks going at least 10mph faster than me. I have seen the same thing during rush hour where a lot of people are weaving in and out of traffic when the fast lane is probably moving at 70-75mph. Being from Houston,  have no doubt that the same thing is going on there. 

[dcar00 14158]

7 minutes ago, Bevo said:

I was driving home on 183 from Bergstrom last night going about 80mph at 10:00pm and I was passed by a motorcycle going about 120. I was also passed multiple times by trucks going at least 10mph faster than me. I have seen the same thing during rush hour where a lot of people are weaving in and out of traffic when the fast lane is probably moving at 70-75mph. Being from Houston,  have no doubt that the same thing is going on there. 

notice this in Austin a lot.  people don't really know how to drive on half full roads.  I could see the amount of fatalities being the same as higher speed crashes will result in higher percentage of deaths vs. the lower speed but higher in quantity rush hour fender benders when everyone is going 30MPH but is looking at their phone.

found this on wiki "In 2010, there were an estimated 5,419,000 crashes, 30,296 deadly, killing 32,999, and injuring 2,239,000".    .6% CFR.  My guess is that rate will be higher this year.

[Surly Bevo 24908]

It's generally talked about and accepted by most paying attention that so far this year we have ~265K more expected deaths than we would see at this point and that likely the vast majority of those excess deaths are the result of Covid.  But what about the last few years, what have we looked like over a longer stretch?  After all death doesn't give a shit about the arbitrary confines of a calendar and while this is clearly killing more than we would expect in a year I was interested in taking a wider view and not just focusing on deaths in excess of the expected average but also offsetting those by when we get less deaths than the CDC says that they would expect.  

I'm not trying to draw a conclusion was just curious as to how we have looked from this facet.  What the numbers tell us is that going back to the beginning of January 2017 we have had just a hair under 185K more deaths than we would have expected over those 3 years and 8 months.  122 of 189 weeks we have had less deaths than the CDC expected the other 67 more deaths than than the CDC expected.  No surprise 28 of those 67 weeks come from 2020 with several 20K plus over what was expected. 

So we had built a bit of a surplus at least in terms of going back to 2017 that Covid has eaten through and then considerably more.  Wish there was a way to take an even bigger step back.  Obviously will be interesting to see how these numbers play out going forward.  We had a good run of excess deaths in late 17, early 18 that were then followed by a long and sustained underrun for the most part in 18 and 19 before this hammer dropped.  

[Samson's Wig 3191]

1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

Thought this was pretty interesting. @BrazilHorn posted a piece of this over on the football board, but I thought this was pretty interesting from a Kaiser Permanente study. The "risk ratio" is just how much more likely that group is to die from Covid, so someone >80 years old is 43.21 times more likely to die of it than someone 0-40 ("reference")

Some of the most interesting ones for me are the "smoker" cohort which is actually less likely to die than former smokers or even never smokers. I know there was some other anecdotal evidence of this in other places. It's also interesting that when you control for other covariates, race isn't really a big mover of the needle. I know early on the New Orleans black community was hit really hard, and so was our hispanic population in Texas. It looks like that was more due to other risk factors, not race in a vaccum.

The time-based risk at the very bottom also lends credence to the weakening impact of Covid. Whether or not that's because of summer, better treatment, a legitimately weakning virus, or some combination thereof, the danger of the virus is 1/3 of what it was in the beginning. 

Anyway, interesting stuff. No real point I'm making, just thought some of you guys would be interested in it.

The smoking thing is really bizarre.

 

 

I knew I shouldn't have quit!

[crash_davis 23101]

Halloween, 2020 Style.

[DFWTexEx 276]

17 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

Halloween, 2020 Style.

That's clever and would help keep the homeowners and the individual trick or treater safe.  Our concern is the chaos and crowding that is going to happen that night.  We usually get 800-900 kids and they get bunched up in line.  I am afraid our lights will have to be off this year for this first time.  We may just leave town.

[crash_davis 23101]

Snotty nosed rona kids are going wipe away their germ juices from their nose, rummage through the candies in the baskets and infect whole damned neighborhoods. I guess there will be more tricks than treats this year.

[Surly Bevo 24908]

Triplehorn will be giving each child a 10 count blister pack of hydroxychloroquine for Halloween.

Trick or Treat

[Sawbonz 27542]

2 hours ago, Bevo said:

I was driving home on 183 from Bergstrom last night going about 80mph at 10:00pm and I was passed by a motorcycle going about 120. I was also passed multiple times by trucks going at least 10mph faster than me. I have seen the same thing during rush hour where a lot of people are weaving in and out of traffic when the fast lane is probably moving at 70-75mph. Being from Houston,  have no doubt that the same thing is going on there. 

I hope you were in the right hand lane motherfucker

[Bevo 13569]

20 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I hope you were in the right hand lane motherfucker

Man, I haven't been abused this much since I started the thread on a partnership I've been considering.

[washparkhorn 9939]

The 10-day Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in South Dakota in August, which drew more than 400,000 people, has now been linked to more than 250,000 coronavirus cases, according to a study by the IZA Institute of Labor Economics. The event will cost an estimated $12.2 billion in health-care costs.

https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/13670/the-contagion-externality-of-a-superspreading-event-the-sturgis-motorcycle-rally-and-covid-19

 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

17 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

The 10-day Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in South Dakota in August, which drew more than 400,000 people, has now been linked to more than 250,000 coronavirus cases, according to a study by the IZA Institute of Labor Economics. The event will cost an estimated $12.2 billion in health-care costs.

https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/13670/the-contagion-externality-of-a-superspreading-event-the-sturgis-motorcycle-rally-and-covid-19

 

It's almost like people don't read these threads. They just find something on twitter & pull the Seagull Move*.

 

*Fly in, shit, fly out

[Chet Steadman 940]

Dang, I hadn’t even really thought about Halloween implications this year.  For the first time, my daughter will be old enough to more-or-less understand what it’s all about yet she won’t be able to experience it all.  

[MNLonghornFUKM 8817]

Unless there some real fishy lag, cases are down almost 45% and deaths down almost 65% compared to last Tuesday

[Incredulity 11655]

3 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Unless there some real fishy lag, cases are down almost 45% and deaths down almost 65% compared to last Tuesday

Take anything with a huge grain of Federal Holiday/Three Day Weekend salt.

[mdleast 8289]

Dang, I hadn’t even really thought about Halloween implications this year.  For the first time, my daughter will be old enough to more-or-less understand what it’s all about yet she won’t be able to experience it all.  

On a related note, Los Angeles is banning trick or treating this year. As a huge Halloween nerd (here in Dallas), I’ve been wondering how this might go down.