Allen53 wrote:
MAJOR UPDATE (see the relevant section of this post for where this applies most directly)
The CDC latest info as of April 25 gives a firmer picture of deaths occurring for Jan. 26 to April 18, 2020, both corona-positive and total deaths:
___________
— Average age of all the coronavirus-positive deaths in the US: age 77;
— Average age of non-infant coronavirus-negative deaths in US: age 76.
(The above is my calculation based on this latest CDC total-mortality data for deaths occurring in the period; they do not give a single “average age at death,” but a series of ranges, in Table 2, from we which we can calculate those average ages. Whatever the exact number is, corona-positive deaths are +1.1 years older than corona-negative deaths.)
___________
— % of COVID19 deaths that occur at home (private residence): 17.5%;
— % of COVID19 deaths that occur at nursing homes: 15.5%;
— % of COVID19 deaths that occur in patients at healthcare facilities: 74.7%.
The “patients at healthcare facilities” will include previously hospitalized patients and new intakes who came down with this flu.
___________
As for New York:
— Total deaths, all causes, in New York City, Feb. 1 to April 18: 25,978;
— Total deaths, all causes, NYC for the same period, expected: 13,120;
— (12,858 excess deaths over a non-peak-flu-event baseline);
— of NYC deaths in the period, total that were corona-positive: 8,073 (31% of all deaths were corona-positive)
___________
Quantifying excess deaths caused by the Panic vs. excess deaths caused by the Virus in NYC:
We with data for New York City through April 18 (NYC proper, not metro area), we can “solve the equations” and say with some precision how many are in each category of death (see above) and what the true hit of the coronavirus is in New York City, and what the true hit of the loss of life to the Panic is.
Here are the four proposed categories again, proposed here to disentangle the corona problem and the significant muddying of the waters that occurs:
https://hailtoyou.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/coronavirus-and-panic-the-five-categories-of-deaths.pngThe CDC data for New York City, just released through April 18, can be used to calculate values for (1.), (2.), (3a.), (3b.), and (4.). With data to plug in, we are able to solve this as a math problem. There is going to be some uncertainty with exact values only for (3a.) and (3b.), so I will offer a range there.
Here we go:
— Expected deaths, NYC proper: 13,120 (CDC). This is (1.)+(2.);
— Excess deaths, corona-negative, NYC proper: 4,785 (CDC). This is (4.). So far, so good…
— Total corona-positive deaths, NYC proper: 8,073 (CDC). This is the sum of (1.)+(3.); of the 8,073, some large number are in the category “would have died anyway,” which is (2.). Others could be those who died of other excess deaths but that were not directly attributable to the virus’ direct effect, (3b.) here, as in a man who has a heart attack, stays home, dies, and at autopsy was found corona-positive (but no symptoms).
— The best-estimates range for “would have died anyway” corona-positive deaths: 1,975 to 5,250. This is (1.). The range is from if (low-end) 15% of expected-deaths [13,120] were positive at death vs. (high-end) up to 40% of expected deaths [13,120] were positive at death. The % can be assumed to be somewhat higher than than the total-population’s at this early point in the epidemic-arc (the midpoint of the measured period is early March), because of high spread in places with high near-near mortality such as hospitals and nursing homes; this is discussed in the main post and is uncontroversial;
— Having found (1.), we are ready to pull the trigger on calculating the range of true coronavirus-attributable deaths for NYC proper (not metro) for Jan. 26 to April 18: 2,825 to 6,100. This is (3a.) in the main post for NYC proper (not metro area). The fatality-rate of the virus is therefore <0.2%, and for an all-population sample it is probably down to 0.1% or even less. (This number of excess deaths attributable to a flu spike means deaths would be up +33% [ca. 13k to 17.5k], which is not much above several other flu spikes observed in the 2010s; see Against the Corona Panic Part III: Just The Flu Vindicated);
— This leaves us with finding the sum of Panic-caused deaths. Deaths that were corona-positive and for which there is an unclear, at-most-ambiguous relationship to the virus: 2,000 to 5,250. This is (3b.), simply the converse of (3a.), and applies to NYC proper (not metro area).
Now we can directly tackle the Virus Effect vs. the Panic Effect:
(4.) + (3b.) = ca. 8,500 (non-corona-attributable excess deaths)
(3a.) = ca. 4,000 (corona flu epidemic-attributable excess deaths)
= The Panic has likely caused at least 2x the number of deaths as the virus, based on CDC data.
This is very much in line with the contents of this post, which was based on tentative numbers and estimates.
How might we estimate “deaths with the virus” vs. “deaths from the virus”? Knowing that the typical victim is in his/her 70s/80s/90s (79% of corona-positive deaths were over age 65; 30% were over age 85), and knowing that the virus spread faster in nursing homes and hospitals, we know a large portion of these deaths, here as everywhere else, are going to be corona-positive but died of other causes.
By the way, only 2.8% of corona-positive deaths were below age 45 (presumably all or almost all with pre-existing conditions or people already terminal as in late-stage cancer patients); you may be surprised to learn that 5.9% of corona-negative deaths were below age 45 [excl. infants; rises to 6.4% with infant deaths]; see Table 2.
(The above paragraphs is an example of how the Corona Narrative tends to fall apart with context; the media never highlights things like this.)
___________
__________________
___________
Conclusions/Summary.
This latest data release, summarized and gone through step-by-step above, strongly corroborates this post’s main conclusions on New York City:
(1) The spike in deaths is more attributable to the Panic than to the Virus (i.e., deaths at home of people too frightened by the media panic to seek help for a heart attack or other emergency);
(2) Given that we now know something up to or exceeding two million in NYC proper alone have had contact with the virus (from the initial study commissioned by Gov. Cuomo pegged to April 20), even in New York City, observed deaths are consistent with the 0.1% fatality-rate range found everywhere else. The true number depends on exactly what share are “deaths with” vs. “deaths from.”
(3) The seemingly higher number of New York coronavirus deaths can be fairly called an illusion, in that: (a.) New York City has a lot of people, and (b.) New York City is urban, which means the virus spread widely, as all flu viruses do. The thing about all those other flu epidemics is that none has ever been tracked in real time like this, none has been subject to saturation media-coverage, or a mass Panic driven by a a criminally irresponsible media.On NYC specifically, I would also add a point-(c.) for what’s behind the illusion of NYC being particularly hard hit: A lot of media is centered in NYC, so they pump up the coverage of this flu virus there; a lot of personality-types love the attention, and the media is full of them).
The NYC mystery is solved. It's over.
From :
https://hailtoyou.wordpress.com/2020/04/23/against-the-corona-panic-pt-iv-what-about-new-york-city-a-case-study-in-hysteria-pandemic-vs-virus-pandemic/#comments
