Michigan-Sportsman.com banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
681 - 698 of 698 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,386 Posts
It was just over 3 weeks ago that I posted the then staggering number of 77,000 new daily cases of covid.
Well, now the question is will we hit 200k.
69,000+ current hostipalizations.
1,300+ daily deaths 3 times this week. Hit 2k in 2 weeks ?

Again the CDC just about nailed the rise in numbers this fall. They and experts like Fauci have been accurate right from the beginning. If only more had listen to them instead of the non-mask morons.

L & O
Hard to believe this was only started a couple of weeks ago. Unfortunately, the number is now about 275,000..are we at the point where we are losing one person a minute?!
I wonder where we’ll be in a week or two after the holiday!?
It seems like we had a 911-like moment when we could all stand together and we blew it.
I wonder how we will behave when the next one rolls around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,135 Posts
300,000 more people have died this year than would have in a normal year. And that figure is two months old. We've been over 1000 Covid deaths a day for six weeks, 2000 deaths a day for two weeks and those numbers are low too because reporting of deaths is slow, doesn't count other excess deaths and lags the events by days or weeks.

You don't have to be so scared that you become a hermit. You don't have to be so scared that you pretend it isn't happening. You need to act responsibly as a member of society. Do you drive on the right side of the road? Do you pay for your groceries? Do you follow hunting and fishing regulations? All of those are intrusions on your *freedoms* that society has forced on you. And I'll bet you're proud of yourself about following them, too. Don't be a sheep and walk yourself or others to the slaughter so your shepherd can buy another 40,000 acres.

The raw numbers don't lie. People are dying. You don't have to know them for it to matter.
The 300000 excess deaths is only a raw number in the sense that it is the number of deaths per week compared to the estimated number of deaths computed by an algorithm.

The kicker is the way excess deaths is reported in my mind is problematic. The CDC has a calculated expected death count for each jurisdiction. They compare the actual deaths count to the expected to get excess death count. But, if a jurisdiction sees a negative excess death count, its value is set to zero. That I do not understand.

Screenshot_20201201-074516_Chrome.jpg

I am not saying people aren't dying and the virus isn't real, but the CDC hasn't been very transparent about what excess deaths mean and too many people use it as an absolute



https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm#techNotes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,525 Posts
I'd be willing to wager that won't happen.

It's going to take 6 months just to do 50,000 health care workers in New Jersey.



Here's the poop from 60 minutes:

In New Jersey alone, the goal is to vaccinate 4.7 million people, beginning with health care workers.

Judith Perisichelli: We've set a very aspirational goal of 70% of the adult population being vaccinated within six months, so depending on how many vaccination sites we have we might be vaccinating between 60,000 and 80,000 individuals a day in New Jersey.

David Martin: Has Operation Warp Speed given you any indication of how many doses of vaccine you're going to get?

Judith Perisichelli: The assumption is about 100,000. If it's a two-dose regimen that will be separated into two doses so it would be 50,000 individuals.

David Martin: How many people do you have in that high priority health care worker category?

Judith Perisichelli: 500,000.

David Martin: You're not even close.

Judith Perisichelli: No. No.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,389 Posts
Maybe but it can be necessary too. Let’s take the case of a fictional poster.

reversekzoofisher believes that Mole Men secretly control the world. In fact, he believes that the internet was created by them just to try to worm into his brain and get him to submit. Every other poster is a bot created by them to fool him. He really truly sincerely believes this. He’s met people who *claim* to be posters but he knows it’s all fake. If he’s harmless and keeps his insane opinion to himself he’s fine. But if he blows up every thread ranting about Mole Men he needs to go. And if he puts booby traps around his neighborhood to catch Mole Men and hurts his neighbors he needs to go to jail. Would anyone say that is wrong? No.

So there’s always a judgement call to be made when someone truly sincerely believes something that is contrary to all facts and evidence. And to what degree they’re harming other people is a huge factor in whether they should be ignored, ridiculed or constrained.
I think we will be okay. We all have brains and our own thought processes. No one should ever be censored for an opinion or unpopular thought. We don't need anyone shielding us from thought. Ridiculous to do so.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,180 Posts
I am not saying people aren't dying and the virus isn't real, but the CDC hasn't been very transparent about what excess deaths mean and too many people use it as an absolute
I am a lucky one so far. It's REAL and wish I never heard the word Covid more less got infected by it. Only thing thats "Absolute" is I will probably have health issues from covid for the rest of my time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,525 Posts
I think we will be okay. We all have brains and our own thought processes. No one should ever be censored for an opinion or unpopular thought. We don't need anyone shielding us from thought. Ridiculous to do so.
There are some political groups that believe they need to protect us from everything.

Heck, I rode a bike without a helmet, drank from the garden hose, rode in the back of a pick up, was spanked, was subjected to cuss words, etc.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
35,310 Posts
The 300000 excess deaths is only a raw number in the sense that it is the number of deaths per week compared to the estimated number of deaths computed by an algorithm.

The kicker is the way excess deaths is reported in my mind is problematic. The CDC has a calculated expected death count for each jurisdiction. They compare the actual deaths count to the expected to get excess death count. But, if a jurisdiction sees a negative excess death count, its value is set to zero. That I do not understand.

View attachment 610571
I am not saying people aren't dying and the virus isn't real, but the CDC hasn't been very transparent about what excess deaths mean and too many people use it as an absolute



https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm#techNotes
It sounds like the negatives being set to zero is at least in part because of underreported or late data, if I'm interpreting the lengthy explanation correctly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,135 Posts
It sounds like the negatives being set to zero is at least in part because of underreported or late data, if I'm interpreting the lengthy explanation correctly.
If they did that for the last 2 months of data, fine, but there is no correction. Are states finding significant numbers of deaths from back in April and May still?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
35,310 Posts
If they did that for the last 2 months of data, fine, but there is no correction. Are states finding significant numbers of deaths from back in April and May still?
I dont think they are. Only a handful. I may have missed it if they said there were no corrections. Looking at the raw data it appeared the numbers do get changed even older than 8 weeks.

But yeah, it is a model. At one point I attempted to chart out an extrapolation just considering actual data through... July? Qnd compared to a previous year's total and we were on track to easily exceed it. I understand that every year is the same.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
28,194 Posts
The 300000 excess deaths is only a raw number in the sense that it is the number of deaths per week compared to the estimated number of deaths computed by an algorithm.

The kicker is the way excess deaths is reported in my mind is problematic. The CDC has a calculated expected death count for each jurisdiction. They compare the actual deaths count to the expected to get excess death count. But, if a jurisdiction sees a negative excess death count, its value is set to zero. That I do not understand.

View attachment 610571
I am not saying people aren't dying and the virus isn't real, but the CDC hasn't been very transparent about what excess deaths mean and too many people use it as an absolute



https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm#techNotes
They haven't been very transparent - yet a 2 minute Google search will find you the explanation right off their website?

Transparency doesn't mean seeking you out and forcing information on you. It just means having the information available for people who seek it out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,033 Posts
The 300000 excess deaths is only a raw number in the sense that it is the number of deaths per week compared to the estimated number of deaths computed by an algorithm.

The kicker is the way excess deaths is reported in my mind is problematic. The CDC has a calculated expected death count for each jurisdiction. They compare the actual deaths count to the expected to get excess death count. But, if a jurisdiction sees a negative excess death count, its value is set to zero. That I do not understand.

View attachment 610571
I am not saying people aren't dying and the virus isn't real, but the CDC hasn't been very transparent about what excess deaths mean and too many people use it as an absolute



https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm#techNotes
This is the same process the CDC has been using all along and their numbers have been good enough for actuaries in many industries including insurance and healthcare. You can’t just throw random numbers at actuaries for years and not have them notice it doesn’t add up. To suddenly question their methods seems like a reach and an effort to politicize a healthcare crisis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,525 Posts
This is the same process the CDC has been using all along and their numbers have been good enough for actuaries in many industries including insurance and healthcare. You can’t just throw random numbers at actuaries for years and not have them notice it doesn’t add up. To suddenly question their methods seems like a reach and an effort to politicize a healthcare crisis.
Insurance and healthcare can use the numbers to justify increased costs. (Does it ever go down?)
As with most things in this world: Follow the money
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimbo 09

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
35,310 Posts
If they did that for the last 2 months of data, fine, but there is no correction. Are states finding significant numbers of deaths from back in April and May still?
Ok so I just compared 11/3 data to 10/2 data. All back to first week of February. There are updates. The average change per month 2 months ago and older is around 160 per week.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,033 Posts
I think we will be okay. We all have brains and our own thought processes. No one should ever be censored for an opinion or unpopular thought. We don't need anyone shielding us from thought. Ridiculous to do so.
You don’t make any distinction between fact based differences in opinion and fact free claims that endanger people? An argument about welded vs riveted boats is the same as one about the health benefits of feeding kids mercury? That’s your position or just the position you’re taking in this case because you agree with the fact free arguments being presented?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,135 Posts
This is the same process the CDC has been using all along and their numbers have been good enough for actuaries in many industries including insurance and healthcare. You can’t just throw random numbers at actuaries for years and not have them notice it doesn’t add up. To suddenly question their methods seems like a reach and an effort to politicize a healthcare crisis.
The number you spoke of early was generated by a new analysis that the CDC started using this year to try and capture excess deaths due to COVID

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm



Prior to this they have done studies in Potentially excess deaths, but it isn't the same as the number being shared now

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/NCHS-Potentially-Excess-Deaths-from-the-Five-Leadi/vdpk-qzpr
 
681 - 698 of 698 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top