COVID-19: Analysis, Statistics, Dangers, Outlook, Conclusions

It's not all about fatality, and people who focus on fatality #s being low vs initial projects are constructing a flimsy strawman. The lasting impact of just a mild case can be severe - kids who would be athletes may never be, we're learning about impact to fertility, it's a multi-organ infection. I just recently 'recovered' from it myself - I'm mid 40s, had 'mild' symptoms, tested positive, never had to go to the hospital, but was almost completely bedridden for SIX WEEKS. A month after being cleared and testing neg twice, I'm still at 93% O2 saturation and suffer from significant fatigue. Before I got sick, I was running 5k 3x/week and 10k every weekend, now I get worn out going upstairs in my house. Fuck all these people who say it's not a big deal. I'm VERY VERY lucky I didn't lose my job or go on short-term disability, it was close. Stay home. Don't get sick. Where did I get it? I assume it was a girl I saw from SA, the only person I had any contact with the week leading up to symptoms. Am I now immune having had it? Maybe. We don't know. There hasn't been enough time for the research to be conclusive. Herd immunity is uncertain at this point. Stay home if you can. Wear a mask. Stay safe. Covid sucks dick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathguy

the people who got passed over due to hospitals being busy with too many people bombarding them to find out about COVID, get tested, etc...

---

I'm curious about your basis for this idea of hospitals being incompetent or negligent in their triage protocols, specifically related to the above. I've not heard of this being a problem, even anecdotally on the news or from hospital working friends; if you don't mind, please share your source and data supporting your statement.

You can find with a Google search. I think Hidalgo county may have had to do this also.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/starr-c...-capacity/#app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milomilo

I'm curious about your basis for this idea of hospitals being incompetent or negligent in their triage protocols, specifically related to the above. I've not heard of this being a problem, even anecdotally on the news or from hospital working friends; if you don't mind, please share your source and data supporting your statement.

---

Why is it that just about anyone who seems to have an issue with my thesis, or my additional postulates, is a new user, registered only, or not just registered but has like, 2-30 posts max? I can't help but think it's the same dude, or possibly 1-2 guys. KB is literally the only exception iirc (?) Also.... only men? Just really odd. :noidea:

To answer your question some of it is in the post(s) higher up with a screen grab and comments.

I also wasn't saying that triage protocols don't work or that hospitals are inept but there was a lot of talk in the media about overwhelmed hospitals. Every day in the news it's talked about (or was talked about). I did read something about that somewhere, others who had a similar idea, but yea, those were only hypotheses as to how you could end up with excess death counts (if excess deaths were/are even true; I showed how that's not really accurate though in the same post up above).

The other thing is if that hypothesis were true it certainly wouldn't be an obvious notice as anecdotal accounts from medical workers. Even a number as large as 100K (if it were even that - it's actually more like 100K net negative excess) spread over a country the size of the U.S. with a population of 331Mn people would not be a massive swarming event that is noticed, not even necessarily as anecdotal events.

It's not just "triage issues" at hospitals, it's the possibility of people who delayed care to "help" others as they heard of all this massive overrunning of hospitals (as if... :rolleyes: ugh hyperbolic media), those who couldn't get appts due to delays with docs or med staff, maybe even those who DID get triaged, yes, indeed, but then were not given as much focus or attention (not on purpose but b/c people are being frantic - even among med staff).

At any rate those were just hypotheses. And they are not even remotely "way out there/off the wall" hypotheses either. Not given the mess among the medical community that the news and hospitals themselves reported was happening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProSlacker

You can find with a Google search. I think Hidalgo county may have had to do this also.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/starr-c...-capacity/#app

---

Oh and tyvm ProSlacker :thumb: Didn't see that link until now. Yep, there you go milo.

Just one example of how and why that could happen across the country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProSlacker

You can find with a Google search. I think Hidalgo county may have had to do this also.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/starr-c...-capacity/#app

---

What I read in the article is that a judge implied on Facebook that there was more demand on a hospital's resources than available, leading to a shelter-in-place order. And that an ethics committee will set-up a triage program: "We have to start making a triage evaluation and realizing who has a better chance." I did not read anything implying incompetence or negligence.

Guys that one had nothing to do with incompetence or negligence. I'm not sure why or how it got framed that way above (??).

I don't believe ProSlacker was indicating that either. His link was acting as a bit of support (e.g. a basic example) of how/why my hypothesis could make sense or be correct & he was answering milos question on my behalf.

Btw.... the use of these 2 words is going to veer this conversation off again and I'll friggin have to get into the semantics of the real message behind the original hypothesis b/c some people are warping it. I really don't wanna have to explain basic propositional or predicate calculus logic along with basic vocabulary words to show how this hypothesis is getting distorted into either hospital "incompetence" or "negligence". Please?? :rolleyes: Ugh. :noidea:

That is NOT at all the point, even IF there were truly excess deaths in total, and in reality I've already shown, using CDC data, how we are actually at net decline in deaths, or par at worst.

I was in a rush and multi-tasking when I posted it - and misread the request for a link. I have seen reports mentioning triage, but not tied to incompetence.

Sorry about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ProSlacker

I was in a rush and multi-tasking when I posted it - and misread the request for a link. I have seen reports mentioning triage, but not tied to incompetence.

Sorry about that.

---

No no you're fine ProSlack. It was a good comment with an example link to support the original supposition. It remains a direct & effective reply to the question you were answering. Good job.

I'm not sure where the incompetence or negligence for triage came into the picture or why. It seems like someone was also using triage incorrectly (I didn't mention it) and not reading my post correctly or else these statements wouldn't have been made.

You don't need to apologise buddy. :cheers: You actually offered one of the only relevant replies on this entire 6th page. :thumb:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathguy

Why is it that just about anyone who seems to have an issue with my thesis, or my additional postulates, is a new user, registered only, or not just registered but has like, 2-30 posts max?

---

For me, and I suspect some others that have been here forever, I've seen the futility of debating anything controversial in an online forum.
I don't argue with anyone that writes thousands of lines - you can never win unless you don't play.
Thanks for expressing your views - I'm sure many found them interesting, and it's good that you can defend your positions - but I'm just here for the hobby.

^ Very true Phaedrus. I agree with you about the futility part and unless you're "willing to play that game". I totally agree. What gets me is the completely idiotic arguments at times. It's like arguing with mentally disabled people half the time. And from that point I do completely feel like I'm wasting my time. However like you said I also know there are many who read it and just don't reply, it appreciate the expression of ideas, many of those people, possibly yourself, are my true target audience.

Thanks for your reply as well. I do completely agree with what you said btw. Really. :cheers: Part of why I do it on this topic is that I feel it's vitally important express these ideas, on this issue, everywhere, as much as possible, for reasons I've mentioned already. :thumb:

Given the topic not a bad thread so thanks. I am terrible at math...I'm 51 so the infected death rate for my group I believe is 0.14 percent correct? Can you put that into a 1 in X chance for me? Like I said I am really bad at math.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron1

Given the topic not a bad thread so thanks. I am terrible at math...I'm 51 so the infected death rate for my group I believe is 0.14 percent correct? Can you put that into a 1 in X chance for me? Like I said I am really bad at math.

---

Hi Baron, I just saw this a minute ago. I hadn't been tracking updates on this post.

Well, you might be bad at math but you are most certainly NOT bad at reading. :tongue: You obviously read my essay :thumb: Yes, correct, you'd fall into the .14% IFR group based on your age.

As a ratio, .14%, which is .0014, or 14 ten thousandths, equals 14/10000 (14 deaths in 10,000 people).

As a simple "1 in X" ratio it translates to: 1 in 714.28.

Seasonal flu at this age group is very near the same risk level. It fluctuates depending on the year from about .075% to .15% or 1 in 1333 to 1 in 666.

At this rate, assuming the current COVID IFR holds true and doesn't continue to go down as we find higher seroprevalence levels, and more infections, your death risk is right on par with a very bad flu year. I expect the COVID IFR will continue to drop as we have seen it do for months & months as more study data comes out. We generally say that the average for flu is about 1 in 1000 (.1%) as a reference point.

Thanks Mathguy.