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

[Anastasis 23469]

Just now, BradInATX said:

I'm not sure what your point is/was.

It was the last summary sentence.

Certainly there is under-ascertainment of COVID mortality occurring, but there is a bit to unpack related to excess deaths and state to state comparisons. 

Can you link the source for those charts? 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

To summarize Brad's point:  We don't know.  But really, I do know...and you don't know.  Let's not be partisan about this, but every one of my posts is going to slant in a single direction.  Let's definitely be as objective about this as we can, but if you looked up confirmation bias in the dictionary, my fucking face is posted there as example #1. 

When you live in an echo chamber, everything sounds awesome.

[BabaYaga 15298]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

 

To summarize you and Cheese's posts

"we got nothin"

At least you didn't try to talk stats and science and then pussy out when called out like he did. You already know better.

We can all sleep better at night there are internet bad asses like Brad out there to keep the online chat room community safe and secure.

[BradInATX 9208]

Just now, Anastasis said:

It was the last summary sentence.

Certainly there is under-ascertainment of COVID mortality occurring, but there is a bit to unpack related to excess deaths and state to state comparisons. 

Can you link the source for those charts? 

Okay. Yeah. I agree with you there. But I you and I both know it's not going to be enough of a driver to materially change anything in Florida. Maybe a state like Mississippi as I mentioned above. 

 

Sauce of charts:

http://www.bu.edu/articles/2021/is-pro-trump-bias-leading-some-us-counties-to-lowball-covid-19-deaths/
https://www.statnews.com/2021/01/25/undercounting-covid-19-deaths-greatest-in-pro-trump-areas-analysis-shows/

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

2 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

At least you didn't try to talk stats and science and then pussy out when called out like he did.

You've shown on the last few pages why I didn't engage you on the "statistics". 

[Don Johnson 4753]

35 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Florida fired its statistician because they told her to underreport and she refused. 

 

No.

[BabaYaga 15298]

2 minutes ago, Don Johnson said:

No.

Exactly - that was an unsubstantiated rumor that conveniently fits the narrative of the king of the Branch Covidians, aka Covid Derka

[BradInATX 9208]

5 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Exactly - that was an unsubstantiated rumor that conveniently fits the narrative of the king of the Branch Covidians, aka Covid Derka

 

Fired for insubordination after she publicly stated that the state was manipulating data.

We now know that Florida is drastically underreporting their data.

 

"Definitely not fired because of that!" -super rational objective thinkers

Edited March 31, 2021 by BradInATX

[BabaYaga 15298]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

 

Fired for insubordination after she publicly stated that the state was manipulating data.

We now know that Florida is drastically underreporting their data.

 

"Definitely not fired because of that!" -super rational objective thinkers

I'd like to introduce Brad to the hundreds of sworn election affidavits that he most certainly summarily dismissed about election tampering.  But THIS ONE, we can trust because she said so.  Jesus christ you really are Covid Derka.

[BradInATX 9208]

 

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I'd like to introduce Brad to the hundreds of sworn election affidavits that he most certainly summarily dismissed about election tampering.  But THIS ONE, we can trust because she said so.  Jesus christ you really are Covid Derka.

 

Haha. I knew your dumb ass was a Q guy.

Muh stolen election!!!

 

 

@DenverHorn @TtomTerrific your boy needs some help here. It's the back 9 of the Masters!

Edited March 31, 2021 by BradInATX

[BabaYaga 15298]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

 

 

Haha. I knew your dumb ass was a Q guy.

Muh stolen election!!!

 

You don't fucking read good do you - nice deflection on your iron clad logic there, bud.  Keep it up Derka.  

[Kyle 207]

51 minutes ago, B00M said:

Source please? 

 

https://www.hhs.gov/coronavirus/cares-act-provider-relief-fund/general-information/index.html

[BradInATX 9208]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

You don't fucking read good do you - nice deflection on your iron clad logic there, bud.  Keep it up Derka.  

Relax guy, they're going to overturn the election and put Trump back as POTUS in August. 

[BabaYaga 15298]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

Relax guy, they're going to overturn the election and put Trump back as POTUS in August. 

That you think that was the point of my post is telling....and not in any way unexpected.  Keep it up Derka

[BradInATX 9208]

Just now, Kyle said:

https://www.hhs.gov/coronavirus/cares-act-provider-relief-fund/general-information/index.html

 

Holy fuck you are dumb. It literally says right there on the link that the Covid relief amounts are determined based off of prior year revenue. It has nothing to do with how many Covid cases they have.

"These funds are allocated proportional to providers' share of 2018 patient revenue. "

[BradInATX 9208]

This page rules. We've got one guy posting QAnon/texags conspiracy theories and another posting links that completely disprove the point he was trying to make. Ya'll are bringing the heat. Real strong work boys.

[Kyle 207]

9 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

 

Holy fuck you are dumb. It literally says right there on the link that the Covid relief amounts are determined based off of prior year revenue. It has nothing to do with how many Covid cases they have.

"These funds are allocated proportional to providers' share of 2018 patient revenue. "

Read the text of the bill sweetheart not the summary. And learn what the word "dumb" means. It makes you seem stupid. 

And for the record, I find your texags/QAnon conspiracies endearing and entertaining.

Edited March 31, 2021 by Kyle

[Kyle 207]

32 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

When you live in an echo chamber, everything sounds awesome.

I am not going to pay $38 to buy the actual study, but the Orlando Sentinel story is a perfect example of today's lazy, agenda-driven journalism.

1. It assumes that deaths must also follow models without consideration for causality

2. We at least read that covid panic caused many to forgo other medical care as well as the increase in suicides, domestic violence, etc.

So one might argue that covid panic not covid drove the delta. Causality is important. Guessing the average grievance study major does not understand correlation vs. causality much less p-values.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

1 minute ago, Kyle said:

I am not going to pay $38 to buy the actual study, but the Orlando Sentinel story is a perfect example of today's lazy, agenda-driven journalism.

1. It assumes that deaths must also follow models without consideration for causality

2. We at least read that covid panic caused many to forgo other medical care as well as the increase in suicides, domestic violence, etc.

So one might argue that covid panic not covid drove the delta. Causality is important. Guessing the average grievance study major does not understand correlation vs. causality much less p-values.

As I said before, when you are a hammer...

It's impossible to do anything other than speculation at this point. And it seems everyone is "speculating" so they can show how "their team" did better than "the other team".

[BradInATX 9208]

4 minutes ago, Kyle said:

Read the text of the bill sweetheart not the summary. And learn what the word "dumb" means. It makes you seem stupid. 

And for the record, I find your texags/QAnon conspiracies endearing and entertaining.

You're right. About 20% of the funding went to hospitals with high Covid caseloads. It doesn't pay for those insured privately or via Medicaid. It's just a Medicare replacement. It's not a financial incentive. Not a single hospital has been caught faking Covid numbers. No data supports it. Logic doesn't support it. It's a viral Facebook conspiracy spread by stupid people like yourself that has been debunked repeatedly.

[BradInATX 9208]

8 minutes ago, Kyle said:

I am not going to pay $38 to buy the actual study, but the Orlando Sentinel story is a perfect example of today's lazy, agenda-driven journalism.

1. It assumes that deaths must also follow models without consideration for causality

2. We at least read that covid panic caused many to forgo other medical care as well as the increase in suicides, domestic violence, etc.

So one might argue that covid panic not covid drove the delta. Causality is important. Guessing the average grievance study major does not understand correlation vs. causality much less p-values.

 

 

Ya'll need to stop using words that you don't understand. Let Anastasis carry you. Maybe PM him some points that you think you want to make and filter it all through him. This shit is word salad that someone who googles "how do stats work" vomits out.

Edited March 31, 2021 by BradInATX

[Anastasis 23469]

37 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Nope, I'm not. I'm sure it's a small piece of the pie, which a) appears to be accounted for by the study (can't get the full text right now, but they attribute 4,000 of the 19,000 deaths above expected to non-Covid) and b) is not going to be drastic in Florida, given that it's in the bottom 10 of heart disease mortality in the country.

I'm not sure what your point is/was. Does Florida only being 48% fraudulent instead of 50% materially change our conversation?

I'd like to see the actual write up of the study, but I doubt that they adequately accounted for impacts of deferred care on excess mortality.  They acknowledge the limitation as a partial explanation of the finding in the STAT piece, just like the AJPH authors did in the Orlando Weekly write up. 

And CV is just one example...we are seeing deferred care across most chronic medical and psychiatric conditions. 

But let's work with the numbers a bit.  5k unaccounted for excess deaths, compared to expected in a 2019 usual care environment. In 2017, there were ~45k CV deaths, 12k stroke deaths, 12k deaths due to chronic respiratory disease, 6k diabetes, 3k suicide, 3k renal disease.  Those are all conditions that could be fairly sensitive to deferred care seeking behaviors, esp CV and stroke in shorter term. So limit to CV and stroke @ 57k or basket them all, let's say 80k total.  You can get to a good chuck of that 5k with relatively small increases in the mortality rates.  Again, certainly there are COVID deaths being undercounted, particularly in rural areas where you might not have professional medical examiners coding death certificates; but I think that deferred care during 2020 is playing a meaningful role in the excess death counts. 

[DaysOff 7951]

It took you until April or May or later to get there. In March you were in the shut it all down In an abundance of caution. And in March maybe that was the correct call as data points were limited I guess. The reason inwas pushing back so hard against the abdication of liberties rose the government was bc I could see coming what happened- that there would always be an “in abundance of caution” crowd way past the time It made sense and in contradiction of data. 
I have to confess, however, that the whole thing didn’t end as badly as I thought it would. Are people ridiculously still out of in person school and pointlessly have their livelihoods taken away in some places?  Sure. But that’s the governance the want so who am I to argue? 
Did texas do what more or less it’s citizenry wanted as far as opening stuff up and being open for business? Yes. Along with Florida, Georgia and many other midwestern/plains states and southern states. 
I’m not going to shed tears over people getting the governance they more or less ask for. 
I’m just happy this thing wasn’t really kicked to the feds to come up with a one size fits all approach (and FTR I’d have supported more power for the counties in Texas- even when I didn’t agree with their use of said power) for the same reasons as more power to the state. It’s a win when we get the government we ask for and desire. 

I'm so glad this virus recognizes state borders. 50 different plans was definitely the way to go.

[Guest Lobo]

The virus respected state borders about as well as a sitting Congressman with a 17YO "niece"  

[BradInATX 9208]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

I'd like to see the actual write up of the study, but I doubt that they adequately accounted for impacts of deferred care on excess mortality.  They acknowledge the limitation as a partial explanation of the finding in the STAT piece, just like the AJPH authors did in the Orlando Weekly write up. 

And CV is just one example...we are seeing deferred care across most chronic medical and psychiatric conditions. 

But let's work with the numbers a bit.  5k unaccounted for excess deaths, compared to expected in a 2019 usual care environment. In 2017, there were ~45k CV deaths, 12k stroke deaths, 12k deaths due to chronic respiratory disease, 6k diabetes, 3k suicide, 3k renal disease.  Those are all conditions that could be fairly sensitive to deferred care seeking behaviors, esp CV and stroke in shorter term. So limit to CV and stroke @ 57k or basket them all, let's say 80k total.  You can get to a good chuck of that 5k with relatively small increases in the mortality rates.  Again, certainly there are COVID deaths being undercounted, particularly in rural areas where you might not have professional medical examiners coding death certificates; but I think that deferred care during 2020 is playing a meaningful role in the excess death counts. 

Yep, that all makes sense, especially if I take your word for it about the numbers you're seeing via your work, which I'll go ahead and do. It's too bad reporting on those deaths from CV, stroke, etc. lag, or else we'd be able to inform the discussion even better with March to March numbers.

But sure, I agree that there could be a bump in deaths due to people not being able to get care, or even avoiding it. So does the study, as they didn't assign all 19k excess deaths to Covid. I asked my brother who is in academia to see if he has access to that report. I'm curious as to how they took 19k excess and attributed 14k to Covid, but I'm assuming they did it similarly to the way you did with more tangible data behind it.

Whether it's 3k or 5k or even 10k of the 19k attributable to other stuff (put my money on about 5-7k), in the least shocking development ever, Florida definitely seems to be underreporting their numbers.

Edited March 31, 2021 by BradInATX

[gyroprotagonist 2592]

1 hour ago, Kyle said:

https://www.hhs.gov/coronavirus/cares-act-provider-relief-fund/general-information/index.html

where does it say there is a $5K bonus for each death labeled C19?  There is a tranche of money that would go to 'high impact' hospitals that have 100+ covid admissions but most of the money requirements look like a hospital just had to treat patients in 2018/2019 .  The distribution was calculated on revenues during that time frame.

Granted i just zoomed through most of it, but maybe it missed the $5K per death (or case; not sure what you were referring to).

Here is an example for the biggest portion of the General Fund

Initial $30 Billion

Payment Allocation per Provider = (2019 Medicare Fee-For-Service Payments / $453 Billion**) x $30 Billion

**This is the total sum of Medicare Fee-For-Service Payments in 2019

Additional $20 Billion

Payment Allocation per Provider = ((Most Recent Tax Year Annual Gross Receipts x $50 Billion) / $2.5 Trillion) – Initial General Distribution Payment to Provider

There is no mention of C19 as even being a factor.  The hospitals get $ solely based on revenue from Medicare from 2019.

 

Below is the only # of Covid cases that would affect a distribution i could find.

$10 Billion to 395 High-Impact Hospitals

• Payment Allocation per Hospital = Number of COVID-19 Admissions* x $76,975

*Hospitals must have 100 or more COVID-19 admissions.

 

So to get some of that $10B, hospitals would have to show or indicate a positive C19 admission.  But nothing is tied to deaths as netting more money.  Sure i guess they could go back and test a gsw victim that died in the ER for C19 and then fudge the admission form to list C19 if they wanted to up the total number.

 

There is a benefit paid to nursing home that are below some standard for C19 infections and C19 deaths.  so there would be an incentive to lie about and lower how many C19 deaths a nursing home had

[justhookit 4191]

21 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Yep, that all makes sense, especially if I take your word for it about the numbers you're seeing via your work, which I'll go ahead and do. It's too bad reporting on those deaths from CV, stroke, etc. lag, or else we'd be able to inform the discussion even better with March to March numbers.

But sure, I agree that there could be a bump in deaths due to people not being able to get care, or even avoiding it. So does the study, as they didn't assign all 19k excess deaths to Covid. I asked my brother who is in academia to see if he has access to that report. I'm curious as to how they took 19k excess and attributed 14k to Covid, but I'm assuming they did it similarly to the way you did with more tangible data behind it.

Whether it's 3k or 5k or even 10k of the 19k attributable to other stuff (put my money on about 5-7k), in the least shocking development ever, Florida definitely seems to be underreporting their numbers.

I’m not going to take the time to read that linked story or study but it appears to be corrected to 5,000 which is right in line with the national average and every other state. Texas has been much worse.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/01/14/us/covid-19-death-toll.html

 

[Wulaw Horn 19070]

2 hours ago, DaysOff said:

I'm so glad this virus recognizes state borders. 50 different plans was definitely the way to go.

Oh my. That’s what you got out of that?  How about maybe a country as big as a ducking continent ought not have the same exact plan to deal with events that are localized in nature?  

[Wulaw Horn 19070]

1 hour ago, justhookit said:

I’m not going to take the time to read that linked story or study but it appears to be corrected to 5,000 which is right in line with the national average and every other state. Texas has been much worse.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/01/14/us/covid-19-death-toll.html

NY times- all the news that’s fit to make up? 

[Kyle 207]

Here's your participation trophy. #millenials
https://www.cms.gov/files/document/se20015.pdf

[Anastasis 23469]

2 hours ago, BradInATX said:

But sure, I agree that there could be a bump in deaths due to people not being able to get care, or even avoiding it. So does the study, as they didn't assign all 19k excess deaths to Covid. I asked my brother who is in academia to see if he has access to that report. I'm curious as to how they took 19k excess and attributed 14k to Covid, but I'm assuming they did it similarly to the way you did with more tangible data behind it.

Seems like maybe you should read the studies that you are basing your arguments around. They attributed the 14k to COVID based on the state reporting of COVID data. But you already know that even without actually reading the study. Or you should.

We used monthly officially reported
COVID-19 death data from January to
September 2020 provided by the Johns
Hopkins University’s Coronavirus Resource
Center, which compiles data
provided by the State of Florida
Department of Health based on decedents
who tested positive for COVID-
19.1

 

 

 

[Anastasis 23469]

Oh, and they did not account for any aspects of deferred care seeking behavior.  But their analysis was good. There is just a lot left to untangle before people start in with their partisan bullshit. Of course, the cart drives the horse these days.  Even among data focused individuals that should try to be more measured. 

[Anastasis 23469]

5 hours ago, Kyle said:

much less p-values.

FTR, P values are stupid. 

[Guest Lobo]

Just now, Anastasis said:

P values are stupid. 

South Austin's Mom, "My P has value!!!" 

[Anastasis 23469]

1 minute ago, Lobo said:

South Austin's Mom, "My P has value!!!" 

It's piss. 

[Guest Lobo]

at her age, anything keeping the motorworks moist is a welcomed reprieve.  

[Anastasis 23469]

[BradInATX 9208]

Seems like maybe you should read the studies that you are basing your arguments around. They attributed the 14k to COVID based on the state reporting of COVID data. But you already know that even without actually reading the study. Or you should.
We used monthly officially reported
COVID-19 death data from January to
September 2020 provided by the Johns
Hopkins University’s Coronavirus Resource
Center, which compiles data
provided by the State of Florida
Department of Health based on decedents
who tested positive for COVID-
19.1
 
 
 

I missed that.

Just like you missed that the 5k number was over six months, not a year when you did you your back of napkin analysis on an annual basis instead of the correct time period. They stopped in September which means they missed peak pandemic and that 5k is probably closer to 10-15k over the entire year of Covid.

The article also isn't clear whether the 14,000 has overlap with the 33,000.

I'd say you already know that but you obviously don't. You miss a lot for an alleged data guy that's allegedly above the partisan fray (lmfao)

[Anastasis 23469]

28 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I missed that.

Just like you missed that the 5k number was over six months, not a year when you did you your back of napkin analysis on an annual basis instead of the correct time period.

The article isn't clear whether the 14,000 has overlap with the 33,000.

But you should know that too.

 

LOL.  That time where you know that Brad still hasn't read the article that he bases his arugment on. It's OK. I am truly sorry for relying on the numbers you were citing erroneously before I pulled the shit myself.  You probably also see the trend in month over month, assuming that you have actually read the article? I hope that by whatever means, whether out of obligation or pity, I care not which, somebody takes it upon themselves to coach you up from a back bench data analyst. 

[BradInATX 9208]

LOL.  That time where you know that Brad still hasn't read the article that he bases his arugment on. It's OK. I am truly sorry for relying on the numbers you were citing erroneously before I pulled the shit myself.  You probably also see the trend in month over month, assuming that you have actually read the article? I hope that by whatever means, whether out of obligation or pity, I care not which, somebody takes it upon themselves to coach you up from a back bench data analyst. 

Maybe one day you'll find the talent to be a business owner instead of a soulless, devastatingly replaceable shill for a pharmaceutical company. I'm rooting for you and I'm happy to give you tips on getting started and coach you up when you're ready.

[Anastasis 23469]

6 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Maybe one day you'll find the talent to be a business owner instead of a soulless, replaceable shill for a pharmaceutical company. I'm rooting for you and I'm happy to give you tips on getting started.

 

 

[BradInATX 9208]

Lol. Anyway I have the study. There's an appendix I want that has the actual details of the model that is probably worth looking at, asked for that piece too.

Won't post the whole thing since its paywalled but their study shows that the excess deaths per the model they used jumped substantially in summer of last year when Florida removed Covid restrictions



They also mention a couple of times that they believe their conclusion is conservative



They do acknowledge the potential unaccounted for increase in deaths from disease etc as discussed. As well as the reduction in accident-typs deaths which none of us touched on.



All in all their conclusion was more "look how dramatically excess deaths jumped up after Florida started ramping restrictions down" than "here's the exact number of unreported Covid deaths". The article originally linked seems to have missed the spirit of the study to focus more on raw death numbers.

[BradInATX 9208]

I have some doubts about the technology they used though. Shit might all be borked.

[Anastasis 23469]

Questioning STATA is strong move for a data analyst operating in the epi space. Clarence's parents have a real nice marriage. 

[StruggleBus 3922]

Get a fucking room, nerds

Edited April 1, 2021 by StruggleBus
Make sure and wear a mask

[BradInATX 9208]

Questioning STATA is strong move for a data analyst operating in the epi space. Clarence's parents have a real nice marriage. 

Being an insecure, humorless pussy is a strong move for, well, you. It's kinda your thing.

What kind of Longhorn gets mad at an aggy joke? Stop crying. Take a deep breath and remember that tomorrow you get to go to work and figure out more ways to charge poor sick people exploitative amounts of money to stay alive. Feel better?

[Anastasis 23469]

5 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

10 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Questioning STATA is strong move for a data analyst operating in the epi space. Clarence's parents have a real nice marriage. 

Being an insecure, humorless pussy is a strong move for, well, you.

Well, whether that's accurate or not, I can at least count the number of month over month columns in the tables I cite and factor in Jan and Feb before I proclaim a conclusion. 

[BradInATX 9208]

Well, whether that's accurate or not, I can at least count the number of month over month columns in the tables I cite and factor in Jan and Feb before I proclaim a conclusion. 

The months before the pandemic was here in any meaningful way? Those are important to you?

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

Shut the fuck up you dorks

[BradInATX 9208]

Naw. This slap fight is perfect for this thread.