Colorado Switches To Honest COVID-19 Death Count, Death Toll Drops 31%

[BeltAndRoad]

9 minutes ago, yuyiinthesky said:

 logic.      assuming that in an article cannot make it ‘not true”.

You should be more concerned with the quality of education and drinking water you received as a child that allowed you to write this word and this statement in the same post.

[yuyiinthesky]

4 minutes ago, BeltAndRoad said:

I have never suggested Taiwan is not a country as you have failed to imply.

Good, sorry if I misunderstood. How could I possibly understand that you would imply Taiwan is not a country, which educated person would think such a nonsense! Really sorry. 
I’m happy that you agree that Taiwan is a country, and I hope this misunderstanding is now cleared up.
 

Are you also happy that Colorado corrected the way they count Covid-19 deaths from “with SARS-CoV-2” to “by SARS-CoV-2”? I wish Italy would have done so too, from the beginning.

[yuyiinthesky]

5 minutes ago, BeltAndRoad said:

You should be more concerned with the quality of education and drinking water you received as a child that allowed you to write this word and this statement in the same post.

And you get 50 cent even for such a nonsense post? Seems to be an easy job you have there!

 

And yes, I’m happy that I got an education without censorship and falsified history, as well as clean drinking water. Good that we agree again, all that is very important.

[BeltAndRoad]

1 minute ago, yuyiinthesky said:

And you get 50 cent even for such a nonsense post? Seems to be an easy job you have there!

Thank you, yes it's a very easy job.  Confused as to where I can spend all these "50 cent" you have given me.  Not sure Curtis Jackson is in high demand at present. As a Fisher of men I find the small irrelevant bait fish give up in 2 posts and usually end with an insult.  

[Solinvictus]

2 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

Please stop, your only embarrassing yourself and the Colorado conspiracy theorist

@ThailandRyan Clearly @Crazy Alex is the type that continues to spew out refutes that don't add up. Quite typical and there a decent amount here on ThaiVisa.

 

They remind me of alcoholics in denial. Or maybe children of alcoholics in denail. Yeah, I bet thats where they got it from.

 

Ryan, one would wonder what these people are like when having a chat with about such issues. Hell, they'd probably go on for days then complain about the price of the bill at the end..without taking in any thoughts of your points to the conversation.

[Crazy Alex]

1 minute ago, Solinvictus said:

@ThailandRyan Clearly @Crazy Alex is the type that continues to spew out refutes that don't add up. Quite typical and there a decent amount here on ThaiVisa.

 

They remind me of alcoholics in denial. Or maybe children of alcoholics in denail. Yeah, I bet thats where they got it from.

 

Ryan, one would wonder what these people are like when having a chat with about such issues. Hell, they'd probably go on for days then complain about the price of the bill at the end..without taking in any thoughts of your points to the conversation.

Rather than engage in a personal attack, why not make your case with facts and logic? Let's start with an easy one. Which do you prefer in Colorado? The old way of counting virus deaths or the new way?

[chessman]

12 hours ago, Walker88 said:

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest Dr Fauci knows more about viruses, epidemiology, pathology and statistics that the OP or any of those supporting the OP's post. If my suggestion or assumption is incorrect, go ahead and post your credentials and accept my apology.

 

Despite that famous Mark Twain quip, statistics do reveal important trends. There is a statistically normal rate of death in any population over a given period. Models are based on them. Models are adjusted for population size. Insurance companies use such models to set premium levels. One can be sure insurers recognize the trend.

 

When the number of deaths runs way above trend, that represents an 'outlier', and scientists and statisticians will look into it to see what might have been causing it. They will look at coroner reports and hospital records to see what was determined or listed as the cause of death. If it is pneumonia or some other ailment strongly linked to CV-19, then that raises a red flag. These deaths are not necessarily added to the CV-19 total, but if the body has yet to be interred, blood samples can be taken to see if CV-19 is present. Remember that these are deaths above trend, or 'outliers' using the term from statistics.

 

Dr Fauci, when he makes a statement that he believes total CV-19 deaths are higher than reported, he is falling back on both his expertise as an epidemiologist and one comfortable with statistics. Still, the 'outlier' deaths, even those whose cause per the death certificate was pneumonia or other maladies associated with CV-19, are not added to the total. Another problem has been the scarcity of reliable tests, as the US has only administered 11.5 million total tests as of this writing.

 

It is a fact that the death rate in the US for 2020 is running approximately 150,000 above the norm, though only 90,000 so far have been added to the CV-19 total. "Something" has caused that rate to run way above trend. For those who died, and for their loved ones, the argument as to the cause makes precious little difference. They're dead, and they are dying at rates far in excess of death rates one would expect using the models that even insurance companies use in the actuarial calculations. To what do those arguing against the CV-19 totals attribute these far above normal rate deaths?

 

Go ahead and believe whatever you wish. It makes no difference. Denying the danger of CV-19, however, would be most unwise for anyone who is obese, a smoker, has Type II diabetes, is older than 60, has high blood pressure, has an underlying condition like COPD, asthma or emphysema, or just has bad luck.

Very noticable that posts like this are basically ignored by people who desperately want to prove their conspiracies.

 

I guess it's difficult to argue with posts written with clarity and logic.

 

I will add that Swine flu had 18,000 lab confirmed deaths but scientists and statisticians estimated the true number to be at least 10 times more than that. The upper range estimates are 30 times more. It is normal for analysis of mortality data to show that deaths during pandemics are underestimated. It is very likely to be the same with COVID 19. Initial data on excess deaths show this clearly. 

 

 

[Scott]

For those who are interested in how a Covid-19 death is determined is outlined here:  

 

https://www.livescience.com/how-covid-19-deaths-are-counted.html

 

It should also be noted that some states have been accused of under reporting Covid-19 deaths: 

 

https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2020/05/08/whats-in-the-censored-florida-medical-examiners-database-of-covid-19-deaths/

 

I suggest you read it if you are interested.   Further playing of politics will result in a suspension.  

 

 

 

[Monomial]

3 hours ago, chessman said:

Very noticable that posts like this are basically ignored by people who desperately want to prove their conspiracies.

 

I guess it's difficult to argue with posts written with clarity and logic.

 

I will add that Swine flu had 18,000 lab confirmed deaths but scientists and statisticians estimated the true number to be at least 10 times more than that. The upper range estimates are 30 times more. It is normal for analysis of mortality data to show that deaths during pandemics are underestimated. It is very likely to be the same with COVID 19. Initial data on excess deaths show this clearly. 

 

 

 

It is not that they are ignored, only that we've long since departed from the era where these lockdowns were based on genuine science. That was the period of "flatten the curve." It is now simply expert opinion with a lot of personal value choices thrown in, and there is no reason to believe this particular expert's opinion is any less biased than any other opinion.  I have encouraged everyone before to read Richard Feynman's Caltech commencement address on cargo cult science. Just search for it on Google. That is a great example of what this has now become.

 

So nobody is doubting the qualifications of anyone. But it does not require a conspiracy to say that even experts have agendas and that this particular expert holds values that not everyone shares. So you can put up an expert who espouses your values, and I can argue mine, and the best we can hope for is to agree to disagree. Layered on top of this are people who have usurped this virus issue for their political agendas, and this gets mixed into the discussion as well.

 

Again, what is happening today with regard to this virus is no longer science. It is more akin to a religious movement, and as such there can no longer be a rational meeting of the minds based solely on facts.

 

Deaths are based on area under the curve, and since everyone of working age needs to get this virus in order to reach herd immunity, the number of deaths will be the same no matter what we do. Whether a quick spike or long drawn out tail. So long as there is a hospital bed available to anyone who needs one, nothing can be gained from lockdowns or restrictions.  The death rate is whatever it is.

 

A vaccine will quite simply take too long and is too risky. We need to accept the natural solution of herd immunity. And once you do accept that, any figures you present are completely irrelevant except for free hospital beds. This is my value choice. You are free to decide on your own values, but nobody's values are superior to anyone else's. Even if that person is an "expert".

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Solinvictus]

9 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Rather than engage in a personal attack, why not make your case with facts and logic? Let's start with an easy one. Which do you prefer in Colorado? The old way of counting virus deaths or the new way?

Well, it is for the better but the amount of deaths are still quite significant no?

[yuyiinthesky]

5 hours ago, Monomial said:

 

It is not that they are ignored, only that we've long since departed from the era where these lockdowns were based on genuine science. That was the period of "flatten the curve." It is now simply expert opinion with a lot of personal value choices thrown in, and there is no reason to believe this particular expert's opinion is any less biased than any other opinion.  I have encouraged everyone before to read Richard Feynman's Caltech commencement address on cargo cult science. Just search for it on Google. That is a great example of what this has now become.

 

So nobody is doubting the qualifications of anyone. But it does not require a conspiracy to say that even experts have agendas and that this particular expert holds values that not everyone shares. So you can put up an expert who espouses your values, and I can argue mine, and the best we can hope for is to agree to disagree. Layered on top of this are people who have usurped this virus issue for their political agendas, and this gets mixed into the discussion as well.

 

Again, what is happening today with regard to this virus is no longer science. It is more akin to a religious movement, and as such there can no longer be a rational meeting of the minds based solely on facts.

 

Deaths are based on area under the curve, and since everyone of working age needs to get this virus in order to reach herd immunity, the number of deaths will be the same no matter what we do. Whether a quick spike or long drawn out tail. So long as there is a hospital bed available to anyone who needs one, nothing can be gained from lockdowns or restrictions.  The death rate is whatever it is.

 

A vaccine will quite simply take too long and is too risky. We need to accept the natural solution of herd immunity. And once you do accept that, any figures you present are completely irrelevant except for free hospital beds. This is my value choice. You are free to decide on your own values, but nobody's values are superior to anyone else's. Even if that person is an "expert".

 

Thanks, I fully agree. Excellent summary. 
I’ll check for Richard Feynman's Caltech commencement address on cargo cult science.

[yuyiinthesky]

10 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Rather than engage in a personal attack, why not make your case with facts and logic? Let's start with an easy one. Which do you prefer in Colorado? The old way of counting virus deaths or the new way?

Definitely the new way is more correct and an improvement.

 

I wish some other countries, such as Italy, would have reported that way from the beginning, a lot of unnecessary panic would have been avoided.

[Traubert]

1 hour ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Definitely the new way is more correct and an improvement.

 

I wish some other countries, such as Italy, would have reported that way from the beginning, a lot of unnecessary panic would have been avoided.

How about China?

[theonetrueaussie]

20 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

Yes Diabetic dies from diabetes incident leading to car accident which claims life.....figure it out Alex.  Just because it was an accident there was a precipitating factor which would lead to that death.  Diabetic forgot to eat a full meal after taking medication, Blood sugars plummeted while driving and the driver became comatose and crashed, killing themselves.  So if someone has Covid, and had a medical issue because of this, then crashed and died, of course Covid was the cause of death because it led to the incident.  Take a heart attack for example.  Your driving and have an MI, you loose control of the car, the car hits a tree, you die, the accident may have killed you, but it was the precipitating MI that led to the death...are you getting it know..... 

except if you wanted to relate your analogy to covid it would be like saying 99.9% of all car crashes should be put as diabetic deaths whether diabetes contributed to the accident or not. In fact the deceased would not even need to be confirmed with diabetes...If the doctor thinks they had diabetes he could put the death as diabetes!

See how stupid that sounds now!! 

[ThailandRyan]

5 minutes ago, theonetrueaussie said:

except if you wanted to relate your analogy to covid it would be like saying 99.9% of all car crashes should be put as diabetic deaths whether diabetes contributed to the accident or not. In fact the deceased would not even need to be confirmed with diabetes...If the doctor thinks they had diabetes he could put the death as diabetes!

See how stupid that sounds now!! 

You need to get a grip on reality.  Just because you have diabetes does not mean your going to die if involved in an accident.  However, if you fail to take medications as needed, or prescribed, or you take too much insulin and you crash your own internal system, then there is a possibility you will die if you have an accident.  If you become comatose because your blood sugars dropped to low, while driving, and you end up crashing and dying, then the coroner decides through the autopsy whether it was the diabetes that killed you because your system stopped before you hit the tree, or because the tree stopped your momentum and caused your head to explode.  Either way it is also investigated as to whether or not you could have survived if you had not crashed and exploded your head all over the dash., and gotten the required treatment to bring you to the right side.  Just because one has COVID, and is involved  in an accident, does not mean COVID killed you.  If the doctor determines that through the autopsy, you had a sudden onset of symptoms which stopped your breathing before you had your accident, then they decide if that is what killed you or something else did.  Medical emergencies happen all the time.  The cause of death is never listed as Traffic Accident.  What is listed is the proximal cause and actual medical condition which caused death, such as blunt force trauma, MI, Stroke, or many other reasons.  Blunt force trauma is when your body meets an immoveable object and that object creates the injuries that caused death.  You need to learn to read like many others  who also seem to have a lack of comprehension of facts.  Do not twist what is real into something that it is not just to fit your beliefs and agendas.

[chessman]

20 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Which do you prefer in Colorado? The old way of counting virus deaths or the new way?

New way seems better. Seems a good idea to trust doctors to make decisions on why people have died. There should be more transparency with other numbers too. The average age of deaths, the overall number of deaths in the state compared with previous years.

Edited May 19, 2020 by chessman

[Crazy Alex]

10 hours ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Definitely the new way is more correct and an improvement.

 

I wish some other countries, such as Italy, would have reported that way from the beginning, a lot of unnecessary panic would have been avoided.

Panic... I think you've touched on what's been bothering me. When I read things like "assumed cases" and read about payments for COVID-19 cases from Medicare and the inherent urge for media to sensationalize, I start associating these things with the method of counting. I guess now I'm wondering why the state of Colorado decided to change their method and why now. We'll probably never know. All this said, there definitely seems to be a certain contingent of people who want the death count to be as high as possible. I find it all disturbing. I would simply like the truth, whatever it may be.

[Crazy Alex]

44 minutes ago, chessman said:

New way seems better. Seems a good idea to trust doctors to make decisions on why people have died. There should be more transparency with other numbers too. The average age of deaths, the overall number of deaths in the state compared with previous years.

I have to say, the article @Scott posted about determining cause of death put me a bit at ease. But still, while I should trust professionals, I am also old enough to know you can't always trust people. And with financial incentives for COVID-19 cases,  transparency you call for is wise. Oh and breaking down the numbers is important. For example, I just read that in Florida, 83% of COVID-19 deaths are people over 65. Of course, that's Florida, which in and of itself explains some of that. But it does beg the question: why don't we have the high-risk groups isolate and the rest of us go on with our lives?

[Credo]

3 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Panic... I think you've touched on what's been bothering me. When I read things like "assumed cases" and read about payments for COVID-19 cases from Medicare and the inherent urge for media to sensationalize, I start associating these things with the method of counting. I guess now I'm wondering why the state of Colorado decided to change their method and why now. We'll probably never know. All this said, there definitely seems to be a certain contingent of people who want the death count to be as high as possible. I find it all disturbing. I would simply like the truth, whatever it may be.

Hospitals don't receive a payment unless someone is diagnosed with Covid, and that is done by administering a test.  The patient also has to be hospitalized and those hospitals stays tend to be very lengthy.   

The cause(s) of death are determined by a doctor or by the medical examiner/coroner.   In many cases there are contributing factors.  A death certificate can list all the contributing factors.  Here's from the link previously provided:  

 

For COVID-19, the immediate cause of death might be listed as respiratory distress, with the second line reading "due to COVID-19." Contributing factors such as heart disease, diabetes or high blood pressure would then be listed further down. This has led to some confusion by people arguing that the "real" cause of death was heart disease or diabetes, Aiken said, but that's not the case.

[Credo]

10 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

I have to say, the article @Scott posted about determining cause of death put me a bit at ease. But still, while I should trust professionals, I am also old enough to know you can't always trust people. And with financial incentives for COVID-19 cases,  transparency you call for is wise. Oh and breaking down the numbers is important. For example, I just read that in Florida, 83% of COVID-19 deaths are people over 65. Of course, that's Florida, which in and of itself explains some of that. But it does beg the question: why don't we have the high-risk groups isolate and the rest of us go on with our lives?

We know that in the first instance, most of the people who are dying are elderly.   The elderly are more likely to have underlying conditions that contribute to the high mortality rate.   We have a lot to learn about the virus, how it spreads and what all the risk factors are.   For example, just how much more at risk are the elderly?   Is it because so many are confined to care facilities and thus constantly exposed to the virus once the infection enters?   We need to keep in mind that elderly people living independently may inherently be healthier, but do they die in equal proportion?

We also see that there are some longer term effects on the heart and kidneys and increases in vascular complications.   Are those relatively short term or do they extend over a longer period of time?   Many viruses remain in our system for the rest of our lives -- herpes and Chicken Pox (which can eventually cause Shingles) are always present.   They may be dormant, but they do come back when conditions are right.

 

[yuyiinthesky]

5 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

You need to get a grip on reality.  Just because you have diabetes does not mean your going to die if involved in an accident.  However, if you fail to take medications as needed, or prescribed, or you take too much insulin and you crash your own internal system, then there is a possibility you will die if you have an accident.  If you become comatose because your blood sugars dropped to low, while driving, and you end up crashing and dying, then the coroner decides through the autopsy whether it was the diabetes that killed you because your system stopped before you hit the tree, or because the tree stopped your momentum and caused your head to explode.  Either way it is also investigated as to whether or not you could have survived if you had not crashed and exploded your head all over the dash., and gotten the required treatment to bring you to the right side.  Just because one has COVID, and is involved  in an accident, does not mean COVID killed you.  If the doctor determines that through the autopsy, you had a sudden onset of symptoms which stopped your breathing before you had your accident, then they decide if that is what killed you or something else did.  Medical emergencies happen all the time.  The cause of death is never listed as Traffic Accident.  What is listed is the proximal cause and actual medical condition which caused death, such as blunt force trauma, MI, Stroke, or many other reasons.  Blunt force trauma is when your body meets an immoveable object and that object creates the injuries that caused death.  You need to learn to read like many others  who also seem to have a lack of comprehension of facts.  Do not twist what is real into something that it is not just to fit your beliefs and agendas.

Brilliant, very brilliant! Nothing to add ????

[farang51]

2 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

I guess now I'm wondering why the state of Colorado decided to change their method and why now. We'll probably never know. All this said, there definitely seems to be a certain contingent of people who want the death count to be as high as possible. I find it all disturbing. I would simply like the truth, whatever it may be.

Actually, they did not change the method; they added a new method. As far as I understand, they will have two numbers now.
 

I don't think any sane person would want a death count as high as possible; I guess most of us want the numbers to be as correct as possible. That said, the new method will result in a bigger undercount than the old method. Meaning, the numbers from the new method will be further from the correct numbers. It may look nice on paper; however, if you make political decisions from the numbers, you may very well risk that the virus spreads faster.

[Solinvictus]

Sorry, I seen all that talk about 'diabetes.'