Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
COVID-19 Check-in 2.0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Mostly fair points, but I still ask, “Where are the unverifiable deaths coming from in their study? If they weren’t symptomatic enough to be classified as a death from covid then it wasn’t covid - at least in my book. It’s like saying a person OD’d when there are no drugs in the body.
Also, correct that 50% is not double. Good catch. So the point I made above means 4500 deaths in Georgia(50% more than 2965), which is even further from the 1% CFR asserted by MIT than when I doubled the number to 6000. .
Here’s what I mean - let’s back out the cases since July 1. (111,211 - 24,910 = 86,301 cases with the same 2965 deaths. That’s actually 3.4% CFR in Georgia. Sound familiar? So if you use MIT’s 12x number or the CDC’s 10x number that yields an IFR between 0.28-0.34% and a true case number of 1,035,000 infections. 1% of that is 10,350. Where are the other 7000 dead people (1% IFR) in the MIT study? Ok Some of then aren’t dead yet but that still leaves a lot of missing dead people to reach 1% if you use their numbers. On this basis, I would say their “worldwide approach” is quite flawed when used as any kind of predictive model for the US.
0.26 was the middle guess by CDC, or what they termed “best”. I’m not willing to entertain MIT’s claim of 50% more deaths, at least not in the US. This stuff is tracked closely and hospitals were incentivized to code a death as covid I haven’t read the study, but they are clearly trying to count deaths without pointing to a real person. Those aren’t facts, so when you say not to discount an academic study as non-factual please take in to account where the study really isn’t factual because they are using a computer model to acquire an estimate. What they have put forward is not a set of facts. It’s a guess, plus look back and you’ll see I left room to allow that perhaps the Boston Globes’ coverage was erroneous, rather than the study.
I’m open to your math, but not understanding the 7.7% you’ve put forward.
These are facts from the Georgia Department of Public Health.
Known case fatality rate under the age of 70 in Georgia is 1%, as of today. But as you say, we need to back out a period of time I only have the last 10 days, so let’s reduce the total known cases in Georgia, under the age of 70, from 99,208 (today) to 75,807. That’s a revised CFR of 1.2% under 70.
(New cases in Georgia since July 1, as of last night, totaled 24,910. Of those, 23,401 were under the age of 70.)
So should we expect 302 of those people under the age of 70 to pass away?
I also think national percentages are not very useful. California is a long way from Nebraska, and frankly I’m not really concerned with what happens there because closing a business in Atlanta will not save someone’s life in Portland Ore. This is also true for someone who lives in Americus GA or Brunswick.GA vs Atlanta.
"I also think national percentages are not very useful. California is a long way from Nebraska, and frankly I’m not really concerned with what happens there because closing a business in Atlanta will not save someone’s life in Portland Ore. This is also true for someone who lives in Americus GA or Brunswick.GA vs Atlanta."
oof
Yes, many areas of the county are seeing different numbers for deaths and infections. I think it's important to find out what is causing that.
If you don't reduce the number of infections in Atlanta and some residents go to St Simon for vacation that happen to be carriers then Brunswick becomes a hot spot. You cannot contain the virus to a geographic area or age range. That is why a regional strategy is important. Closing Jacksonville would increase the number of people going to Camden County Georgia for instance. After all I doubt Texas got the virus from China. It spread from Europe to NY to NE to Florida etc.
Edit Just watched FL Governor press conf. Keeps saying about the big rise being 21-40 age range which is true. However, in the last 7 days there has been 16,000 who are 55+ of which 8,000 are 65+. This is 9 times what it was in May.
What will it mean when each county has a share of infections equal to the percentage of the state population in each county? In other words, when the virus has spread evenly among the population?
Statistics can be great but are often weaponized to mislead or control thought in people.
Fulton, Gwinnett, Dekalb, and Cobb have the highest rates per 100k people. What exactly does that mean? That those areas are the “Hotspots” in need of special attention?
Here are their infection rates per 100k
Fulton 321
Cobb 250
Gwinnett 178
Dekalb 177
So just looking at the rate per 100k, you would be led to believe those areas have a disproportionate number of cases.
Now let’s look as a percentage of statewide cases and compare the percentage of the population in each place
Fulton 8.99% of cases and 9.7% of the state population
Cobb 6% of cases and 7.1% of the population
Gwinnett 9.6% of cases and 8.8% of the population
Dekalb 7.1% of cases and 7.1% of the population
So while the media refers to these areas as “hotspots”, in reality they have the exact percentage of cases one would expect for a virus that has already been pretty well circulated.
Georgia has too many counties for me to calculate all of them, but a quick random selection demonstrated this trend held true for many counties across the state, with a few exceptions, such as Dougherty Co, which has 0.83% of the population but 1.97% of the state infections, and Hall Co, with 2% of the population and 3.3% of the cases.
One might correctly point out that Dougherty had an early surge and Hall is experiencing one now, but the numbwrs have always been supposedly high in Metro Atlanta.
My guess is that the numbers were higher initially in Atlanta, but have evened out as the virus did what viruses are going to do - spread.
Are these just irrelevant coincidences?
Still have issues downloading twits. @JeffSentell needs to follow up on this once he gets back from vay-cay....
Well. All I know is that our numbers in Miami are bad. But people do what they do.
It ain’t good news. Positive tests, deaths, positive test percentage is all trending up.
Yep. I hate it but that’s all true.
Deaths may be up a week over time, but at one point NYC alone had almost as many deaths a day as the entire country does right now. This thing is going to run out of nursing homes to ravage. More than 40% of all US deaths are nursing home related. Then what, given that this thing doesn’t kill young people?
We’ll see, but I think this will level out pretty quickly. It will be talked about far longer than it lasts in an effort to secure a mailbox ballot
Well you remain confident. I hope you’re right. Thing is, nobody really knows much. But the early trends from this bump up don’t look promising.
again, would love to be wrong here and this is just college kids getting sick and recovering. Time will tell and in the meantime do the right thing.
Anyone heard from @BayAreaDawg ? We're praying for you. Hope you are getting better!
No it's not coincidental. You cannot contain this geographically while allowing freedom of movement both intrastate and interstate. The wider the consistent application of restrictions the better the outcome.