Replies: 15
| visibility 1
|
Oculus Spirit [93606]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Someone fact check this for me with NYT or Wapo.
May 24, 2020, 2:14 PM
|
|
"Horowitz: The CDC confirms remarkably low coronavirus death rate. Where is the media?
The CDC just came out with a report that should be earth-shattering to the narrative of the political class, yet it will go into the thick pile of vital data and information about the virus that is not getting out to the public. For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%.
Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago..."
https://www.conservativereview.com/news/horowitz-new-antibody-study-strong-evidence-lockdown-strategy-wrong-course/
That article is filled with links and support including the CDC website and its May 20 report.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v2COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California Background Addressing COVID-19 is a pressing health and social concern. To date, many epidemic projections and policies addressing COVID-19 have been designed without seroprevalence data to inform epidemic parameters. We measured the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in a community sample drawn from Santa Clara County. Methods On April 3-4, 2020, we tested county residents for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 using a lateral flow immunoassay. Participants were recruited using Facebook ads targeting a sample of individuals living within the county by demographic and geographic characteristics. We estimate weights to adjust our sample to match the zip code, sex, and race/ethnicity distribution within the county. We report both the weighted and unweighted prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. We also adjust for test performance characteristics by combining data from 16 independent samples obtained from manufacturer's data, regulatory submissions, and independent evaluations: 13 samples for specificity (3,324 specimens) and 3 samples for sensitivity (157 specimens). Results The raw prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in our sample was 1.5% (exact binomial 95CI 1.1-2.0%). Test performance specificity in our data was 99.5% (95CI 99.2-99.7%) and sensitivity was 82.8% (95CI 76.0-88.4%). The unweighted prevalence adjusted for test performance characteristics was 1.2% (95CI 0.7-1.8%). After weighting for population demographics of Santa Clara County, the prevalence was 2.8% (95CI 1.3-4.7%), using bootstrap to estimate confidence bounds. These prevalence point estimates imply that 54,000 (95CI 25,000 to 91,000 using weighted prevalence; 23,000 with 95CI 14,000-35,000 using unweighted prevalence) people were infected in Santa Clara County by early April, many more than the approximately 1,000 confirmed cases at the time of the survey. Conclusions The estimated population prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Santa Clara County implies that the infection may be much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases. More studies are needed to improve precision of prevalence estimates. Locally-derived population prevalence estimates should be used to calibrate epidemic and mortality projections.
### Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
### Funding Statement
We acknowledge many individual donors who generously supported this project with gift awards. The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study, nor in the decision to prepare and submit the manuscript for publication.
### Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The data is not available for sharing at this time.
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22935]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16892
Joined: 12/2/00
|
Run your own fact checks
May 24, 2020, 11:37 PM
|
|
Based on the websites you consistently reference, it’s wise to do your own fact checking.
I hope the CDC figures are accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22935]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16892
Joined: 12/2/00
|
Some assumptions to consider
May 25, 2020, 1:51 AM
|
|
If death rate is 0.26%, that means ~12% of population has already been infected. Do you think that number is right?
About 0.20% of New York City residents overall have already died. Do you think every resident has already been exposed?
If half the US population is infected, that yields 400k deaths. Is that worrisome?
The 3+% death rate warnings when the govt wanted us to shelter seem crazy high. The 0.26% rate when the govt wants us to open up now seems too low.
Truth is somewhere in between. Hopefully it’s this low.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93606]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
I don't trust anything anyone says.
May 25, 2020, 8:23 AM
|
|
I'm like Brix when it comes to trusting government numbers. I have no respect for the CDC. The CDC's primary and original commission was to identify and stamp out infectious diseases. I posted links to reports of the CDC refusing to do that job. My position on the CDC, FDA and NIH has not changed since the onset of this epidemic. I complained about bureaucrats then and nothing has changed my mind.
However, we've all followed CDC guidelines and worshiped the science which produced the numbers that locked America down. Are you questioning those numbers now?
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22935]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16892
Joined: 12/2/00
|
As I said, I hope those numbers are accurate
May 25, 2020, 11:01 AM
|
|
I’m not interested in running the math or research right now to try to find flaws in the study. For example, does the two week lag cause an error in the figures. What population was studied? Was this study posted by scientists vs bureaucrats? Etc etc.
I In my opinion, 0.26% seems low but I’m not going to grab a pitchfork and start bashing everybody to fight those figures.
I try to not only believe science when it’s convenient to my story. The CDC has smarter scientists than me.
Has a more mainstream media like Fox posted this yet? I’m hesitant when it’s only on very right leaning opinion blogs.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55658]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 35261
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Good. BUT. We still don't have a treatment or a vaccine.
May 25, 2020, 12:22 PM
|
|
The numbers will eventually show that this thing is about like other plagues in mortality rate, etc.
That's well and fine.
BUT. HUGE BUT.
We don't have a vaccine (may never have one) and we don't have a treatment (which would help way more than a vaccine right now because we could freely allow non-vulnerable populations to be in contact with one another).
Unless and until we have those things, thousands and thousands will continue to die, even with a very low mortality rate.
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [881]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 2125
Joined: 2/3/12
|
Number 1, I'd look for something more recent
May 25, 2020, 3:58 PM
|
|
That study is from two months ago (April 3-4). It's not really worth fact checking at this point.
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [881]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 2125
Joined: 2/3/12
|
Don’t know if this is the most recent
May 25, 2020, 6:01 PM
|
|
https://news.usc.edu/170565/covid-19-antibody-study-coronavirus-infections-los-angeles-county/
They estimate 2.5-7% of LA county had been infected a/o mid-April. If you use the deaths a/o today, that’s 0.3-0.84%, but that’s not the right number to use. It should be the deaths 2-3 weeks after the study, where I get something between 0.15 and 0.5%.
By the time you collect data, analyze, verify, and get the results reviewed, the study is already out of date.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [59974]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22471
Joined: 5/24/17
|
What are you doing here.....
May 25, 2020, 6:23 PM
|
|
you speak sensibly
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [881]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 2125
Joined: 2/3/12
|
DHEC is using a 10X multiplier
May 25, 2020, 7:09 PM
|
|
on known cases. That gives a 0.43% rate for SC and if you apply to NY and NJ with larger samples, 0.78 and 0.71% respectively. NYC has the highest penetration we know of, so that's some of the best info. For the counties of queens, bronx, manhattan, and kings, the number of cases are 2.7, 3.9, 2.3, and 2.2% of the total populations. The deaths for those counties are 0.27, 0.38, 0.24, and 0.26% of the total populations. I've been optimistic with a 0.1% rate, but I guess it's going to be higher.
I think the numbers will be more accurate after we start to see active cases decline and testing catch up. Otherwise we are just looking at a small part of the picture. We'll need that info if it ramps back up after thanksgiving.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93606]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Did your source reveal that...
May 26, 2020, 8:22 AM
|
|
NY and the surrounding geographical area accounts for over 50% of America's fatalities and that 46% of the deaths in that geographical area were LTC facilities which were forced by governors executive orders to allow covid patients to be returned for care?
You need to read Darrell Huff's How to Lie With Statistics
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [881]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 2125
Joined: 2/3/12
|
Source is Johns Hopkins
May 26, 2020, 8:57 AM
|
|
Other sources show the breakdown with NH and AC. 57% of the deaths in NC and KY are in nursing homes too. 32% of SC. And a lot of states are not reporting the true numbers. White House last week said it was not required to report covid deaths in nursing homes before May 8. I don’t believe the GA, FL, or SC numbers for that reason.
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [881]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 2125
Joined: 2/3/12
|
Help out and look up the real numbers
May 26, 2020, 9:10 AM
[ in reply to Did your source reveal that... ] |
|
instead of just running your mouth.
Here’s a start: in bronx county, 624 of 4393 deaths were in nursing homes and adult care facilities.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93606]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
You want a movie but all science can do is take a snapshot..
May 26, 2020, 8:16 AM
[ in reply to Don’t know if this is the most recent ] |
|
which can be plotted on a graph to identify large changes in the past with which to predict/guess/estimate future expected changes. Did you miss high school math?
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22935]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16892
Joined: 12/2/00
|
Did you learn math with an abacus
May 26, 2020, 7:27 PM
|
|
You missed the lesson on providing value to conversations.
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [881]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 2125
Joined: 2/3/12
|
The story died down fast
May 26, 2020, 8:02 PM
[ in reply to You want a movie but all science can do is take a snapshot.. ] |
|
so many missed it. A week or two ago, we found out that the famous “cubic model” the white house was using was actually that. A curve fit to historical data that they extrapolated out to predict a rapid decline in cases. Then as time went by and they were using more days in the fit, the curve changed inflection and predicted a rapid increase. At some point they figured out what they were doing was pretty #### stupid.
It’s that Lazzaro guy with the sort-of PhD.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 15
| visibility 1
|
|
|