Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Covid stats


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Then you're a better person than I am. I find that I'm struggling to feel bad for the thousands of Americans who consciously choose this path and then seem to celebrate it -- all whilst racking up thousands and thousands of dollars in hospital expenses, both for themselves and for those with whom they share health funds.

Yep

https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/08/19/the-cost-of-being-unvaccinated-just-went-up---most-insurers-are-passing-costs-back-to-patients-as-covid-hospitalizations-soar/?sh=6c9b5ae7bd9a

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Harry T. Clark said:

Here is what was said by the CDC from the alert I cited:

The test is changing.  Why?  It would obviously be better to have a test that could differentiate between Sars and the Flu.  That is a no brainer.  However, the one used currently cannot.  It never could.

This is from the cdc guidlines on administration of the commonly and currently used test, pg. 37, last bullet point, under the "Limitations" heading: 

https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

This isn't fake news or misinformation.  The current test simply cannot rule out disases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens, like the flu.  So, is it a big leap to think that perhaps there were some false positives over time that were actually the flu?

People lie.  Corporation heads lie.  The media lies.  Commenters on blog posts lie.  Companies hire media influencers to attack counternarratives on social media.  Sometimes bots are used. 

Is it possible that some government officials lie?  I'm sure you will agree that Trump was certainly capable of lying and probably did a bunch.  Perhaps there are those in the CDC, currently, and other agencies that are lying on behalf of Pharma?  Is that possible or no?

I think the goal should be to get at the truth, given how untrustworthy people are, given how money can corrupt scientists and government officials alike.  The trick is to take a look at the information presented and learn how statements can be made in such a way as to mislead.  In this case, there certainly is a change in the test that couldn't eliminate the possibility that a positive test came from something other than sars-cov-2.  It says so in the very protocol instructions that the CDC put out.

Why is the test changing?  Because we can't differentiate flu from covid based on symptoms alone, so this is a convenient and cost effective way to test for both bugs at once.    

Quote

This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.

That seems obvious to me.  The test is specific to Covid.  It was not made to test for (and thus rule out) other pathogens.   A negative test cannot therefore rule out other pathogens.  Neither can a positive test, for that matter.  It cannot rule out a comorbidity of both Covid and the flu or other bacterial infection at the same time.   It simply is not specific/sensitive to any other disease.  The flu can't trigger a false positive.    "Can't rule out" is not equivalent to "flu will trigger false positives"  

Just curious, where did you come across this sentence in question?  Is this something that is being spread on social media or from radio/news personalities?

Good article:

Quote

Does the recall mean the original CDC PCR test gave inaccurate results?
No. The PCR test was extraordinarily accurate in identifying the right virus: SARS-CoV-2. 

"Just because the original test wasn't built to detect influenza doesn't mean that it wasn't accurately reporting results," Dr. Broadhurst explains. "We can be very confident that a positive result from a PCR test represents a true case of SARS-CoV-2 because of how these tests were designed."

 

Did previous PCR tests confuse COVID-19 cases for influenza cases?
Not at all. "The reported numbers were based on highly accurate laboratory tests," says Dr. Broadhurst. "The original test could detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 with very high specificity," – meaning the test does its job very well.

A PCR test is an excellent identifier of COVID-19 cases, because of something called specificity. Basically, specificity means that the test is designed to only detect one type of virus. Dr. Broadhurst says, "The PCR test is validated against many different coronaviruses and common respiratory viruses, including influenza so that it would not give false-positive results." Meaning, researchers subjected the test to many different samples to see if it would give the wrong result. It correctly identified SARS-CoV-2 out of all of these samples.

 

How do we know COVID-19 cases aren't actually influenza?
Every PCR test must be validated, meaning checked for its sensitivity and specificity. The Nebraska Medicine PCR test has been extensively vetted with multiple ways of validation. 

Dr. Broadhurst explains, "At the beginning of the pandemic, we went through a very rigorous process. That includes demonstrating the specificity of the test to exclude anything that may cause a false positive."

Dr. Broadhurst, microbiologist Paul Fey, PhD, microbiology fellow Hannah Creager, PhD, and other experts worked together to ensure a trustworthy test. To ensure specificity, they tested clinical samples and also used databases of genetic sequences.

Our researchers took clinical samples from before Nebraska had community spread of COVID-19 and ran the samples through the test. These clinical samples included known results of influenza and other common viruses. The PCR test reported negative on all of them, which makes sense.
Researchers also looked through large databases of viral genetic sequences – the building blocks of a virus. That way, they ensured the PCR test only picked up a piece unique to SARS-CoV-2 and not another coronavirus or influenza. "Comparing these genetic sequences means we can avoid cross-reactivity," says Dr. Broadhurst. 

https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/pcr-test-recall-can-the-test-tell-the-difference-between-covid-19-and-the-flu

 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
On 9/19/2021 at 6:42 PM, The Nehor said:

Person in Alabama:

“Have another clear example of the liberal government inflating the death statistics! I told them that my aunt, my mother, and my half-sister died of COVID and they recorded that three people died.”

This kind of racial/social stereotyping would be unacceptable if it were used to attack other folks. Maybe you could choose not to do this any more?

Edited by Bernard Gui
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Snodgrassian said:

https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/08-02-2021-lab-alert-Clarifications_about_Retirement_CDC_2019_Novel_Coronavirus_1.html

That is not the current test, that is the test that received emergency use in Feb 2020, and it is still being used in some places, but multiple tests are being used that can differentiate…

it seems like an insincere question to ask why they are replacing a test when you mention the reason why it needs to be replaced with the better alternatives.

In your narrative, who is behind the COVID situation and why? 

The chances of death from this are well below 1% yet we have all these lockdowns, mask mandates even though there is a lot of science contrary to them.

I think it's been exaggerated. 

The media focuses on the positive test numbers but doesn't let us know how many are actually sick, really sick, etc.  The Atlantic article uncovered how hospital statistics also don't let us know how many are merely mildly affected and how many are more so.  Also, the testing results in a lot of false positives.  Yet, that is never discussed and/or branded as fake news.

The vaccines aren't working as well as advertised and the adverse affects aren't allowed to be discussed. 

There isn't a differentiation between someone who died from covid and someone who died from other factors but had covid too.

Why the exaggeration?

Then, there is this push, like with your question above about narrative, to group any and all questioners as kooks to be despised.  

How about we look at what is reality instead of branding differing views from the vaccine narrative as fake news.  It's been too political and the democrats are just as responsible like the republicans have been.

Bottom line, the vaccines don't prevent the spread of this disease.  Natural immunity seems to be better.  Masks don't work as well as advertised and the chances for those who don't have comorbidities, obesity, are not elderly, from dying from this is minuscule.  So, let the people decide what they want to do.  Stop with the unnecessary restrictions.

Link to comment
Quote

The current test simply cannot rule out disases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens, like the flu.  So, is it a big leap to think that perhaps there were some false positives over time that were actually the flu?

You are apparently assuming flu pathogens would register as Covid pathogens rather than not registering at all…why do you believe this as likely?  Do you have any evidence this is how the test works?

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, pogi said:

A hospital won't admit you with a "merely mild" case of Covid.   If they have been admitted to an ICU - that is "critical". 

But hospitals admit to the ICU those who are very sick with other issues while having a mild case of Covid that isn’t contributing to the need to be in the ICU.  And they die at times…say from heart failure due to a long history of heart issues while having asymptomatic Covid.  I think the concern is in how those kinds of cases are being counted.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
40 minutes ago, Harry T. Clark said:

The chances of death from this are well below 1% yet we have all these lockdowns, mask mandates even though there is a lot of science contrary to them.

I think it's been exaggerated. 

The media focuses on the positive test numbers but doesn't let us know how many are actually sick, really sick, etc.  The Atlantic article uncovered how hospital statistics also don't let us know how many are merely mildly affected and how many are more so.  Also, the testing results in a lot of false positives.  Yet, that is never discussed and/or branded as fake news.

The vaccines aren't working as well as advertised and the adverse affects aren't allowed to be discussed. 

There isn't a differentiation between someone who died from covid and someone who died from other factors but had covid too.

Why the exaggeration?

Then, there is this push, like with your question above about narrative, to group any and all questioners as kooks to be despised.  

How about we look at what is reality instead of branding differing views from the vaccine narrative as fake news.  It's been too political and the democrats are just as responsible like the republicans have been.

Wrong on death percentages.

If the total covid death numbers are false in any direction it is skewing at not recording all the people who died of the coronavirus. The excess death compared to previous years have too wide a variance. If it isn’t coronavirus why are so many people dying? If we apply the same criteria used to estimate the deaths from the Spanish flu to the current pandemic the US is probably much closer to a full million dead.

Alabama had more deaths than births last year, something that has never happened before.

Talk to people working funeral homes or (especially) the crematories. They are backed up to an absurd degree. Or is that industry all in on the conspiracy too?

They are treated as kooks because they are genuinely kooks. Even when corrected by good information they keep repeating the discredited lies. Like you do for example.

And don’t even try with the “both sides are doing it” crap. There is such a thing as degrees of a mistake and having your messaging be a little off or making a misstep and correcting it is not on the same level as denying the foundation of modern medicine and just denying what is actually happening. 

44 minutes ago, Harry T. Clark said:

Bottom line, the vaccines don't prevent the spread of this disease.  Natural immunity seems to be better.  Masks don't work as well as advertised and the chances for those who don't have comorbidities, obesity, are not elderly, from dying from this is minuscule.  So, let the people decide what they want to do.  Stop with the unnecessary restrictions.

Stop lying and stop trying to kill people. Quit the death cult and work with the sane to actually beat the pandemic.

I don’t want anyone to die but if people have to die I hope it is mostly the delusional people convinced the disease is no big deal. If someone chooses to be wrong in life it seems fitting that their legacy be a cautionary tale of what not to do.

Link to comment
56 minutes ago, Calm said:

But hospitals admit to the ICU those who are very sick with other issues while having a mild case of Covid that isn’t contributing to the need to be in the ICU.  And they die at times…say from heart failure due to a long history of heart issues while having asymptotic Covid.  I think the concern is in how those kinds of cases are being counted.

I see.  That seems so silly to me.   If severe Covid wasn't significantly contributing to hospitalizations, than hospitalization/ICU rates should be around base-line levels.  We wouldn't be in the crisis we are in right now in Idaho and elsewhere.   We can easily look at heart disease and stroke rates, etc. and see that there is not any spike that could explain what is happening in hospitals across the globe right now.  I want to know how he explains the hospitalization situation if it is not Covid causing the spike.  What is causing it then?  Show me the numbers @Harry T. Clark  Enough with the conspiracies and dangerous speculation.  Give me something that I can chew on - some real data.  What is causing the nearly universal and significant increase in hospitalization/ICU care if not Covid? It shouldn't be hard to provide that data if it is not really Covid causing the spike.  Are all the doctors and nurses who are quitting due to the unsustainable and unprecedented fatigue just making it up?  Just how far down does this conspiracy go?

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
19 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

And then she concluded by letting everyone know that she has zero regrets about 'exercising her right' not to be vaccinated ... 

And if people aren't confusing enough, this same person overnight liked my Facebook post that links to the article in the OP and expresses my gratitude for the miracle of life- and health-saving vaccines ... :unknw:

Link to comment
18 hours ago, Harry T. Clark said:

The chances of death from this are well below 1% yet we have all these lockdowns, mask mandates even though there is a lot of science contrary to them.

I think it's been exaggerated. 

….

Bottom line, the vaccines don't prevent the spread of this disease.  Natural immunity seems to be better.  Masks don't work as well as advertised and the chances for those who don't have comorbidities, obesity, are not elderly, from dying from this is minuscule.  So, let the people decide what they want to do.  Stop with the unnecessary restrictions.

Just a few questions… 

with the current death rate (or even what you believe the death rate tone), if you applied that to, let’s say, to the chance of your flight crashing, would you still choose to fly? 
 

I believe you when you say “I think it’s been exaggerated.” But how do you account for the 15% increase in deaths from 2019 to 2020? That is not a small number. 
 

 

and one final comment, of course natural immunity is probably the safest form of immunity, but you have to get the disease first, and if you get it and are unvaccinated, the chances of severe infection are magnitudes higher. If I get the virus and am vaccinated, I then too will have an even better immunity and better odds of not having the longterm negative effects of the virus.

it is such an absurd argument that the vaccine is not effective when you mention the hospitalization numbers. As the number of vaccinated individuals increases, of course the percentage of hospitals toons of vaccinated will increase. It is not a 100% solution. If 100% of the population is vaccinated, guess what, there will still be hospitalizations and, funny how stats work, 100% of the hospitalizations will be of vaccinated people!?!? This is why using the Israeli study is so easy to manipulate the narrative. 
 

also, the ICU bed stats numbers don’t tell the full story of capacity. There also must be enough staff to manage the beds. In Utah, 69% of icu utilization is considered at capacity.

 

 

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, Snodgrassian said:

Just a few questions… 

with the current death rate (or even what you believe the death rate tone), if you applied that to, let’s say, to the chance of your flight crashing, would you still choose to fly? 
 

I believe you when you say “I think it’s been exaggerated.” But how do you account for the 15% increase in deaths from 2019 to 2020? That is not a small number. 
 

 

and one final comment, of course natural immunity is probably the safest form of immunity, but you have to get the disease first, and if you get it and are unvaccinated, the chances of severe infection are magnitudes higher. If I get the virus and am vaccinated, I then too will have an even better immunity and better odds of not having the longterm negative effects of the virus.

it is such an absurd argument that the vaccine is not effective when you mention the hospitalization numbers. As the number of vaccinated individuals increases, of course the percentage of hospitals toons of vaccinated will increase. It is not a 100% solution. If 100% of the population is vaccinated, guess what, there will still be hospitalizations and, funny how stats work, 100% of the hospitalizations will be of vaccinated people!?!? This is why using the Israeli study is so easy to manipulate the narrative. 
 

also, the ICU bed stats numbers don’t tell the full story of capacity. There also must be enough staff to manage the beds. In Utah, 69% of icu utilization is considered at capacity.

 

 

Can I borrow this? ;) Thanks for your input!

Link to comment
On 9/21/2021 at 3:27 PM, Harry T. Clark said:

The chances of death from this are well below 1% yet we have all these lockdowns, mask mandates even though there is a lot of science contrary to them.

 

Yes.  There is a relatively low chance of dying from the Rona.  However, that small percentage of people getting severely ill and dying is still enough people to create a huge challenge for hospitals.  I work in healthcare and can personally attest to this.   COVID is not the Black Plague but it’s still a strain on our healthcare system.  This is why we have so many people yelling past each other on this whole issue.  
 

And even though I witness the pain and suffering caused by this virus regularly, I would have to agree with you on mask-mandates and lockdowns.  

I think we should have followed Josep Smith’s model: “I teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves.”

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Rivers said:

Yes.  There is a relatively low chance of dying from the Rona.  However, that small percentage of people getting severely ill and dying is still enough people to create a huge challenge for hospitals.  I work in healthcare and can personally attest to this.   COVID is not the Black Plague but it’s still a strain on our healthcare system.  This is why we have so many people yelling past each other on this whole issue.  
 

And even though I witness the pain and suffering caused by this virus regularly, I would have to agree with you on mask-mandates and lockdowns.  

I think we should have followed Josep Smith’s model: “I teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves.”

Current evidence suggests we are way below the level Joseph Smith envisioned and probably need Law of Moses level handholding.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Rivers said:

Sweden was able do it.

Sweden has had a relatively high number of cases per capita. They didn’t do that well. They were held up as a gold standard for those advocating for herd immunity early on but later waves were not kind to it.

They are doing well compared to the US but that is true of almost everywhere.

Link to comment
On 9/18/2021 at 12:51 PM, Harry T. Clark said:

Maybe some of these Canadian cases are really the flu as the PCR test cannot distinguish between covid and the flu?  The cdc article below discussed how the PCR test will no longer be used after the end of the year because it cannot distinguish between covid and the flu.  Perhaps this is where the missing flu cases went?

Amen and amen.

They (health authorities) who lead us cause us to err

Link to comment
6 hours ago, CelestialSeething said:

Amen and amen.

They (health authorities) who lead us cause us to err

The statement you are praising was debunked in this very thread. It is false. A lie. A deliberate misreading. Yet despite the attempts of many to point this out those who want to believe it continue to repeat it after it is debunked to them directly. They care nothing for truth. It is why the crematories are backed up trying to keep up with the stacks of incoming bodies.

This scripture seems applicable:

Quote

Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

Or, as we used to paraphrase the scripture on my mission with a few additions to emphasize the point:

Woe unto the liar for he shall be thrust (not peacefully prodded, not passively persuaded, not gently led, but thrust) down to hell.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...