Calm the F**K Down! - What is wrong with everyone?

Corey Giles wrote:

Probably counting only half the covid 19 deaths

The greatly overestimated statistics aren't already high enough for you huh.

I thought that the point of sarcasm was that you didn't need to point it out. Anyway, you said 'it', you either meant people should go to beaches, or like your leader perhaps 'sarcastic'.

Think...

And besides, no one in the world has advocated staying out of the sun....I am not, still walking the dog and going for daily run.

Actually, 'I am Sam' has been a handle well before movie, and in family for over 99 yrs. But thanks anyway.

I am Sam wrote:

Facts Matter? wrote:

When you stop channeling the Sean Penn character in the move you took your name from, you will be better off. (If you can)

Actually, 'I am Sam' has been a handle well before movie, and in family for over 99 yrs. But thanks anyway.

The best part of this entire thread is when facts matter destroys people and they have no clue that they have been destroyed. I’ve never seen anything like it frankly.

thread lurker wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

Actually, 'I am Sam' has been a handle well before movie, and in family for over 99 yrs. But thanks anyway.

The best part of this entire thread is when facts matter destroys people and they have no clue that they have been destroyed. I’ve never seen anything like it frankly.

Hi facts matter ????

You’re not fooling anyone, only person he destroyed is himself. 61,001 he said ??????

thread lurker wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

Actually, 'I am Sam' has been a handle well before movie, and in family for over 99 yrs. But thanks anyway.

The best part of this entire thread is when facts matter destroys people and they have no clue that they have been destroyed. I’ve never seen anything like it frankly.

Exactly, pure gold!!

Corey Giles wrote:

Probably counting only half the covid 19 deaths:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/27/health/deaths-spike-covid-spread/index.html

you've got to be kidding with that study- did you even read that garbage. Not peer-reviewed as it is an obvious amateur study. Actually it's not though it's a paid professional piece of propaganda and they tell you so right from the start. And how dishonest of CNN to put up a link that DOES NOT take you to where you will find this inofrmation:

Competing Interest Statement

DMW has received consulting fees from Pfizer, Merck, GSK, and Affinivax for topics unrelated to this manuscript and is Principal Investigator on a research grant from Pfizer on an unrelated topic. VEP has received reimbursement from Merck and Pfizer for travel expenses to Scientific Input Engagements unrelated to the topic of this manuscript. All other authors report no relevant conflicts.

And then this garbage will be picked up by corporate media and the lies will spin round and round.

Competing Interest Statement

DMW (Daniel Weinberger who works at Yale School of Public Health) has received consulting fees from Pfizer, Merck, GSK, and Affinivax for topics unrelated to this manuscript and is Principal Investigator on a research grant from Pfizer on an unrelated topic. VEP has received reimbursement from Merck and Pfizer for travel expenses to Scientific Input Engagements unrelated to the topic of this manuscript. All other authors report no relevant conflicts.

Funding Statement

DMW acknowledges support from grants R01AI123208 and R01AI137093 from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/National Institutes of Health. VEP acknowledges support from grants R01AI112970 and R01AI137093 from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/National Institutes of Health. NGR acknowledges support from grant R35GM119582 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences/National Institutes of Health and 1U01IP001122 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). TC acknowledges support from R01AI146555 from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/National Institutes of Health.

They're all tied to Pharmaceutical companies and likely have investment opportunities throughout that industry. Get outta here with that garbage.

This is a beautiful case study in propaganda.

And here's where people can go to see where that study still sits:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.15.20066431v1

How dishonest can you get.

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.png

The 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

I'm finding quite the opposite. I talk to lots of folks from different backgrounds every day and very few are convinced this is being accurately portrayed by the media and almost without exception want more information.

Interesting to note that yours and the individual you agree with is an appeal to ignorance.

Ignorance is bliss!

I love how all of the paid trolls here use bb code to bold things. Pretty telling.

What’s ironic is that if the government hadn’t done anything all the conspiracy crazies would be out complaining about how the government is covering it up. When it comes to conspiracy theories, it’s less about the issues at hand and more about how the fringe element is smarter than everyone else.

vdghb wrote:

What’s ironic is that if the government hadn’t done anything all the conspiracy crazies would be out complaining about how the government is covering it up.

Just swallow that bitter pill and admit you were wrong. Quit deflecting and making excuses.

Then get to work undoing the damage you've contributed to. The economic devastation and the precedent of dictatorship are serious problems now.

You have less than 0 understanding of how research works.

Nicht einmal falsch, as some famous German would say.

It's posted on a pre-print server for one -- of course it's not peer reviewed. You can thank scientists for embracing open access and preprinting, you would not have been able to see this stuff 5 years ago in biosciences. Almost all would have been 1) held up for months in peer review and 2) then behind a paywall.

Thankfully now much more science is at your fingertips the instant the authors deem it ready for review.

So, be grateful that you even have these things to completely misunderstand, misrepresent, and generally blather off-topic about. What a time to be alive.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Just swallow that bitter pill and admit you were wrong. Quit deflecting and making excuses.

Then get to work undoing the damage you've contributed to. The economic devastation and the precedent of dictatorship are serious problems now.

Bro, you just posted 2600 cringe

Words to remember:

I already said that at 61,001 I would admit I was wrong

61,001 is the number to shut me up.

I was asked a while ago at what point I would admit I was wrong, so I'm well on record. The answer then was the same as it is now. If the coronaviorus kills 61,001 people.

[quote]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.png

Where can I see the category of excess death of unknown coronavirus status? You know the ones who have NOT been tested, which is pretty much the overwhelming majority of coronavirus deaths at home? Are you counting them in the coronavirus negative categoriess, so you can pretend they are caused by the confinment?

You sure seem like the only objective people on this earth fighting against the agenda-driven mainstream media.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Harambe wrote:

Bro, you just posted 2600 cringe

Whatever, and don't call me bro. Admit you're wrong.

The world is now in very serious trouble, and not because of a virus. Are you so cynical you can't put your hubris aside even now? Because it was me saying all along this was no worse than a flu, and me proven right, you'll hold the whole world hostage?

Infection fatality rate 0.1%. There it is. Get over yourself.

Serious trouble? ?

What are talking about ?

Obviously not the virus.......and you already assured us there would be no recession......so what are so worried about?

chillax man....it's all good.

you told us so.

Iceland has tested 20% of its population which means it has a pretty good idea of who is infected and who isn't and they have an IFR around 0.6%, so 6 times as high in a country that is young, healthy and has a very well functioning healthcare system that is not overloaded.

So we're talking about something that is at least 6 times as deadly as the flu and left uncontained far more aggressive to spread with no vaccine, no immunity and no known treatment.

most articles from reliable news outlets seem to be putting figures out which indicate it is about 10 times as deadly as normal flu.

so in a country of 50 million with no precautionary measures put in place you might end up with around 150,000 dead in the first wave. whereas flu is more like 10,000-15,000 dead a year. but it's not just the dead you have to consider, it's the strain on hospitals. if they are all full of corona patients then where do all the other patients with life threatening cancers, diseases, A&E patients etc go? So you have more deaths among those people as well.

people need to get healthier and old people need to take a lot more precautions including wearing full face masks and avoiding any crowded area. seems the only way that doesn't completely obliterate the economy.