Octopus Overlords

Blackhawk wrote:Given his history, I assumed he was suggesting that non-COVID deaths are being reported as such as part of the 'hoax.'

malchior wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 2:52 pm This thing feels like the reason why it is more deadly is it has so many expressions. In some it may kill lung tissue, weaken your heart, bring cytokine storms, attacks brain/nerves, and now perhaps form clots throughout the body.

Smoove_B wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 1:43 pm

malchior wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 12:58 pmOur idea of social distancing is going to turn out to be not strict enough + Americans are too stubborn to change fudge factor thrown in = Worse than expected results. However the results are still magnitudes of order better than doing nothing.

If we were doing contact tracing (Spoiler: we should be doing contact tracing), my guess is we'd discover a black market that exists in NYC and parts of NJ where people are not only doing things they shouldn't be (like getting haircuts) but actively engaging in social events - private parties/dinners with small circles of friends/family they believe are safe.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has added six new symptoms to its list of possible signs of the coronavirus. Previously, the CDC only noted fever, cough and shortness of breath as symptoms.

The agency has updated its list to include: chills, repeated shaking with chills, muscle pain, headache, sore throat and new loss of taste or smell. Shortness of breath has also been changed to "shortness of breath or difficulty breathing."

em2nought wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:37 am

Freyland wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:17 am
You know how to treat trolls, right? The "Ignore" button. It's certainly more effective than ingesting bleach.

Who's trolling now?

ImLawBoy wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:21 pm

em2nought wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:37 am

Freyland wrote: Sat Apr 25, 2020 11:17 am
You know how to treat trolls, right? The "Ignore" button. It's certainly more effective than ingesting bleach.

Who's trolling now?

Still you.

LordMortis wrote:I'm not normally one to advertise *plonking*. I think it's verboten. But Ima come right out and say I have blocked people I know in the flesh and blood on other social media for posting that crap. My frustration for not being able to deal with intentionally and sarcastically spreading that kind of ignorance is my own and walking away is the only way I know how to deal with it.

RunningMn9 wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 8:24 amHowever, to someone that thinks that doctors and hospitals are making this all up, and treating suicides and shark attacks as COVID-19 deaths, why? Where is there any evidence that they are over-counting? When NYC’s at-home death call rate skyrockets by 400-500% year-over-year in March, what makes someone think that this is a rash of people being run over by steamrollers?

If in the beginning of March, we discovered that suddenly cancer was killing two and a half times as many people - and you could catch cancer just by talking to someone with cancer - do people think we wouldn’t do anything about it?

RunningMn9 wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 8:24 am

LordMortis wrote:I'm not normally one to advertise *plonking*. I think it's verboten. But Ima come right out and say I have blocked people I know in the flesh and blood on other social media for posting that crap. My frustration for not being able to deal with intentionally and sarcastically spreading that kind of ignorance is my own and walking away is the only way I know how to deal with it.

When I returned, my first order of business was to clear my foe list, which had grown extensively towards the end due to external factors. I still have moments of regret.

However, to someone that thinks that doctors and hospitals are making this all up, and treating suicides and shark attacks as COVID-19 deaths, why? Where is there any evidence that they are over-counting? When NYC’s at-home death call rate skyrockets by 400-500% year-over-year in March, what makes someone think that this is a rash of people being run over by steamrollers?

If in the beginning of March, we discovered that suddenly cancer was killing two and a half times as many people - and you could catch cancer just by talking to someone with cancer - do people think we wouldn’t do anything about it?

Still, the department's Director, Dr. Ngozi Ezike used part of her time during Sunday's health briefing to explain how the department determines if a death is related to Coronavirus.

Essentially, Dr. Ezike explained that anyone who passes away after testing positive for the virus is included in that category.

"If you were in hospice and had already been given a few weeks to live, and then you also were found to have COVID, that would be counted as a COVID death. It means technically even if you died of a clear alternate cause, but you had COVID at the same time, it's still listed as a COVID death. So, everyone who's listed as a COVID death doesn't mean that that was the cause of the death, but they had COVID at the time of the death." Dr. Ezike outlined.

RunningMn9 wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:35 pm But even those aren’t necessarily over counts, right? Let’s say I’m in hospice with cancer, and I die from complications due to COVID-19, it doesn’t really matter that I was in hospice with cancer. I still died from COVID-19 before I died from cancer.

RunningMn9 wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:35 pm But even those aren’t necessarily over counts, right? Let’s say I’m in hospice with cancer, and I die from complications due to COVID-19, it doesn’t really matter that I was in hospice with cancer. I still died from COVID-19 before I died from cancer.

It means technically even if you died of a clear alternate cause, but you had COVID at the same time, it's still listed as a COVID death.

malchior wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:52 pm

RunningMn9 wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:35 pm But even those aren’t necessarily over counts, right? Let’s say I’m in hospice with cancer, and I die from complications due to COVID-19, it doesn’t really matter that I was in hospice with cancer. I still died from COVID-19 before I died from cancer.

Right. Plus this seems like a pretty easy problem to fix. There is some baseline of deaths from different causes. If the baseline declines a statistically significant amount then it's probably a candidate for some investigation to see if there is a count issue.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:36 pm

RunningMn9 wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:35 pm But even those aren’t necessarily over counts, right? Let’s say I’m in hospice with cancer, and I die from complications due to COVID-19, it doesn’t really matter that I was in hospice with cancer. I still died from COVID-19 before I died from cancer.

Yes, but if you died from cancer and had a COVID-19 positive test you'd also be counted as a COVID-19 death.

malchior wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:42 pm Alcohol-related deaths have been counted this way for years. Any alcohol in your system? It is alcohol-related no matter what the level is.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:51 pm

malchior wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:42 pm Alcohol-related deaths have been counted this way for years. Any alcohol in your system? It is alcohol-related no matter what the level is.

I don't think that's the case.

malchior wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 3:16 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:51 pm

malchior wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:42 pm Alcohol-related deaths have been counted this way for years. Any alcohol in your system? It is alcohol-related no matter what the level is.

I don't think that's the case.

There are the Federal guidelines for this. Does everyone adhere to them? Of course not, but not everyone counts rapes and murders right either. The Uniform Crime Reporting stats and health statistics in general have all sorts of data issues. Tens of thousands of municipalities, counties, states, and a Federal government. I've been neck deep in this subject for 3 months now. Anyway, that alcohol guidance is supposed to be the standard. In the end though to get back to a point instead of nitpicking I agree that it is not of any interest in real-time for political decisions.

Jaymon wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 3:30 pm

malchior wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 3:16 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:51 pm

malchior wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:42 pm Alcohol-related deaths have been counted this way for years. Any alcohol in your system? It is alcohol-related no matter what the level is.

I don't think that's the case.

There are the Federal guidelines for this. Does everyone adhere to them? Of course not, but not everyone counts rapes and murders right either. The Uniform Crime Reporting stats and health statistics in general have all sorts of data issues. Tens of thousands of municipalities, counties, states, and a Federal government. I've been neck deep in this subject for 3 months now. Anyway, that alcohol guidance is supposed to be the standard. In the end though to get back to a point instead of nitpicking I agree that it is not of any interest in real-time for political decisions.

I had a relative with a history of seizures. they were on seizure meds, and being treated regularly for seizure related issues. Then one night, they had a seizure, and crashed the car, leading to eventual death. But, the tox report showed alcohol in their system, that meant the insurance company was no longer responsible, and was able to write the whole thing as an alcohol related incident.

Skinypupy wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 1:53 pm After testing positive a week before, aunt and uncle were both admitted to the hospital yesterday. They were going to try and wait it out at home, but uncle couldn't take more than 2-3 steps yesterday without collapsing. They're in isolation rooms, with him in ICU on a ventilator. No real prognosis at this point, just hoping that he'll trend upwards. He's basically living the nightmare of suffocating to death, alone, without being able to even see his family. They're both 74, with no underlying health issues other than being a bit overweight.

I'm trying really fucking hard not to lash out at the "just the flu", "let some of them die so I can get a haircut" crowd today.

Xmann wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 1:04 pm I'm struggling on when to decide it's ok for my teenage son to go back to work at Chic Fil A. He's been off since this has started and is bored out of his mind. Making some extra money for college next year would be nice too.

On one hand, what's the difference in letting him go back tomorrow compared to a month from now? He doesn't cashier, he works the back. I don't know if wearing a mask is required.

Our community is opening back up Friday and my thought was to wait and see what happens with people. But again, what is my deciding factor?

Smoove_B wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 2:18 pm Not sure how helpful that is, but it's nice to see the industry helping to form guidelines.

Ferengi: "Our word can be our bond."
Ferengi #2: "Until we decide to break it!"

Daehawk wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 2:28 pm Personally I wouldn't want to go back yet. But if they are opening back up and he doesn't return they may fire him. If I was forced back Id wear a mask at the least. If they said no masks or something Id not go. But this is me.If he is really only in the back all the time and never emptying the garbage in front or anything then he should mainly just have to worry with his fellow workers. They should do a temp check for all the good that does...but its something.

The New York Times wrote:A top emergency room doctor at a Manhattan hospital that treated coronavirus patients died by suicide on Sunday, according to her father.
***
The elder Dr. Breen said his daughter had contracted the coronavirus but had gone back to work after recuperating for about a week and a half. The hospital sent her home again, before her family intervened to bring her to Charlottesville, he said.

Dr. Breen, 49, did not have a history of mental illness, her father said. But he said that when he last spoke with her, she seemed detached, and he could tell something was wrong. She had described to him an onslaught of patients who were dying before they could even be taken out of ambulances.

“She was truly in the trenches of the front line,” he said.

He added: “Make sure she’s praised as a hero, because she was. She’s a casualty just as much as anyone else who has died.”

YellowKing wrote: Thu Apr 23, 2020 10:24 am In this case, the lives we're trading away could be disproportionately minorities/the poor. That needs to be taken into account. While we trade policy for life in an abstract sense all the time, there is the potential for real abuse here and the ethics need to be considered carefully.

New York Post wrote:The consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic have been enormous, and New York has suffered more than anywhere else in the world. Compared as a separate country, the New York area would rank, by far, as No. 1 for deaths per capita.

The New York-New Jersey-Connecticut tri-state area accounts for approximately 60 percent of all US deaths. Theories abound, but the New York area itself is different: New York is the top port of entry for the hundreds of thousands of tourists coming to the US every month from China; Gotham has a uniquely high density of living that swells daily by millions from workers and tourists; and Manhattan sees some 1.6 million commuters daily, mostly on crowded public transit, including 320,000 from Jersey alone.

Yet the pandemic toll is falling, dramatically so in New York, including both hospitalizations and deaths per day. Few doubt that the unprecedented isolation policies had a significant impact on “flattening the curves.”

Now, we face another, even greater problem: how to sensibly re-enter normal life. This must be based on what we now know, not on worst-case projections, using facts and fundamental medical knowledge, not fear or single-vision policies.

First, we know the risk of dying from COVID-19 is far lower than initially thought, and not significant for the overwhelming majority of those infected.

Multiple recent studies from Iceland, Germany, USC, Stanford and New York City all suggest that the fatality rate if infected is likely far lower than early estimates, perhaps under 0.1 to 0.4 percent, i.e., 10 to 40 times lower than estimates that motivated extreme isolation.

In the Big Apple, with almost one-third of all US deaths, the rate of death for all people ages 18 to 45 is 0.01 percent, or 13 per 100,000 in the population, one-eightieth of the rate for people age 75 and over. For people under 18, the rate of death is zero per 100,000. Of Empire State fatalities, almost two-thirds were over 70 years of age. And regardless of age, if you don’t already have an underlying chronic condition, your chances of dying are small. Of 7,959 NYC COVID-19 deaths fully investigated for underlying conditions, 99.2 percent had an underlying illness.

Second, protecting older, at-risk people helps prevent hospital overcrowding. Of New York City’s 38,000 hospitalizations, less than 1 percent have been patients under 18 years of age. Studying 4,103 confirmed COVID-19 patients with symptoms bad enough to seek medical care, Dr. Leora Horwitz of NYU Medical Center concluded: “Age is far and away the strongest risk factor for hospitalization.”

Recent studies show a far more widespread rate of infection and lower rate of serious illness than early World Health Organization reports that noted 80 percent of all cases were mild. The vast majority of younger, otherwise healthy people don’t get hospitalized.

Third, due to fear and the single-minded focus on COVID-19 regardless of cost, other people are dying. Critical medical care isn’t being provided. Millions of Americans have missed critical health care for fear of encountering the disease, and people are dying to make room for “potential” coronavirus patients.

When states and hospitals abruptly stopped “nonessential” procedures and surgery, that didn’t mean unimportant care. Treatments for the most serious illnesses, including emergency care, were missed. Some estimate about half of cancer patients deferred chemotherapy. Approximately 80 percent of brain surgery cases were skipped. Perhaps half or more of acute stroke and heart-attack patients missed their only chances for early treatment, some dying and many now facing permanent disability. Transplants from living donors are down 85 percent from the same period last year.

And that doesn’t include the skipped cancer screenings, avoided childhood vaccinations, missed biopsies of now-undiscovered cancers numbering thousands per week — and countless other serious disorders left undiagnosed.

Ænima wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:17 am Gee, I wonder why only right wing rags are quoting that article...