ADVERTISEMENT

Covid deaths pushing toward 5k per day.

Is Covid-19 worse than the flu?


  • Total voters
    10
They adjust all the time, new numbers come in and they modify them. I didn't add in the 6k or whatever that they added in a single day and sometimes they move deaths around. It should be generally similar.

For example last weekend's dip showed 1500 on back to back days. Some states adjust death numbers back to Saturday and Sunday, taking from Monday - Wednesday. The numbers are now over 1700 while my weekday numbers will show higher. Because I don't **** with it after the first day.

You almost have to look at a whole week to get a picture of the trend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crazyhole
Heres the weekly data.
Week starting - Deaths
3/16 - 436
3/23 - 2742
3/30 - 8381
4/6 - 13923
4/13 - 15017

Only a 1,100 increase in weekly deaths is a good sign.
 
Anything under 2400 today will indicate a peak is reached. Let’s hope so since we are already approaching 45k no peak could end up meaning 100k first wave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crazyhole
In a normal year 100 people per day in the US die in car wrecks. Right now it’s is probably far far less.
 
And who knows how many were actually covid since the numbers can be fudged. infections are probably 1000% higher since a lot of healthy people show no symptoms.
It will be interesting to see the numbers after they do an official audit.
 
You already have an aging and increasing population so deaths should be increasing normally. Not as simple as doing simple compare.
US population growth is negligible at best (between 0.3 and 0.4% assuming full immigration) but it is also known. It’s easy to model this in. Countries and cities are already experiencing record high deaths. We know the number of deaths year over year as well. It’s actually extremely simple to do.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...sends-england-wales-death-toll-to-record-high
 
Audit how? They are dead and cremated or buried.
They will go back and look at things like what a typical number of deaths due to influenza or pnuemonia and take those out of this number. Or natural decline, stroke, etc. and do the same thing. Right now all we have is numbers of deceased who had Covid-19, not necessarily the number that it killed.
 
They will go back and look at things like what a typical number of deaths due to influenza or pnuemonia and take those out of this number. Or natural decline, stroke, etc. and do the same thing. Right now all we have is numbers of deceased who had Covid-19, not necessarily the number that it killed.
The idea that this is a significant number of people that just happen to be dying in a two week window while they have C19 just doesn't hold up to any mathematical analysis.

Only 15% of people tested come back positive and we're only testing people with severe symptoms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hemightbejeremy
They will go back and look at things like what a typical number of deaths due to influenza or pnuemonia and take those out of this number. Or natural decline, stroke, etc. and do the same thing. Right now all we have is numbers of deceased who had Covid-19, not necessarily the number that it killed.
You don’t think everybody hunkering down at the house decreases flu numbers? They can tell if it is flu mainly because we can test for influenza. It also has a different progression timeline in the seriously ill than does Covid19.
 
The idea that this is a significant number of people that just happen to be dying in a two week window while they have C19 just doesn't hold up to any mathematical analysis.

Only 15% of people tested come back positive and we're only testing people with severe symptoms.
Pretty much, yeah. It will still probably be the leading cause of death in April but not quite as high as what it is portrayed as now. Like the 102 year old twin sisters who died and had covid-19. In the final aggregate those deaths will be re-classified as general decline, etc. Pneumonia is a big one because death counts dropped off to almost 0 in March. That is statistically impossible.
 
They will go back and look at things like what a typical number of deaths due to influenza or pnuemonia and take those out of this number. Or natural decline, stroke, etc. and do the same thing. Right now all we have is numbers of deceased who had Covid-19, not necessarily the number that it killed.

Pneumonia is more of a symptom, it is caused by viruses or bacteria, and can be a symptom of coronavirus. You can't say pneumonia deaths and corona deaths should be separated, if it was the coronavirus that caused the pneumonia.
 
Pneumonia is more of a symptom, it is caused by viruses or bacteria, and can be a symptom of coronavirus. You can't say pneumonia deaths and corona deaths should be separated, if it was the coronavirus that caused the pneumonia.
Its not that they are separated. What I'm talking about is how many people died from this that wouldn't have died in an average month. They do the same thing every flu season. If we got daily flu death updates it would look like 100,000 people die every year from the flu, but when they do the final analysis and take out the average numbers of deaths from other things like kidney failure or bacterial infections (which can be a byproduct of the flu), the final numbers drops way down to 50 or 60k. It has nothing to do with being able to test for the flu accurately.
 
Pretty much, yeah. It will still probably be the leading cause of death in April but not quite as high as what it is portrayed as now. Like the 102 year old twin sisters who died and had covid-19. In the final aggregate those deaths will be re-classified as general decline, etc. Pneumonia is a big one because death counts dropped off to almost 0 in March. That is statistically impossible.
There is not such death classification as “general decline”, all deaths have an underlying medical cause.
 
Its not that they are separated. What I'm talking about is how many people died from this that wouldn't have died in an average month. They do the same thing every flu season. If we got daily flu death updates it would look like 100,000 people die every year from the flu, but when they do the final analysis and take out the average numbers of deaths from other things like kidney failure or bacterial infections (which can be a byproduct of the flu), the final numbers drops way down to 50 or 60k. It has nothing to do with being able to test for the flu accurately.
That’s not what happens at all. In fact it’s the opposite. There are far far fewer deaths from flu positive patients than 50-60k. They extrapolate the larger number to account for undercounts amongst the elderly and those who die at home.
 
There is not such death classification as “general decline”, all deaths have an underlying medical cause.
Ok, call it organ failure. The point is that the number of deaths from any given disease or whatever is fairly predictable. Right now everything is just being called Covid-19.
 
Its not that they are separated. What I'm talking about is how many people died from this that wouldn't have died in an average month. They do the same thing every flu season. If we got daily flu death updates it would look like 100,000 people die every year from the flu, but when they do the final analysis and take out the average numbers of deaths from other things like kidney failure or bacterial infections (which can be a byproduct of the flu), the final numbers drops way down to 50 or 60k. It has nothing to do with being able to test for the flu accurately.

Any type of virus or bacteria that kills someone does so by causing other problems that lead to death. If this is how it works then there should be zero official flu deaths because everyone who dies of the flu dies from some other symptoms.
 
Ok, call it organ failure. The point is that the number of deaths from any given disease or whatever is fairly predictable. Right now everything is just being called Covid-19.
What you are saying isn’t actually true. In fact we are still undercounting. Because only patients that are classified as Covid19 through positive laboratory confirmation or through clinical diagnosis are counted. Removing the Covid19 deaths in NYC for example, the “other deaths” that you now think are underreported are actually at 150% of their normal levels.
 
That’s not what happens at all. In fact it’s the opposite. There are far far fewer deaths from flu positive patients than 50-60k. They extrapolate the larger number to account for undercounts amongst the elderly and those who die at home.

You arent understanding what I'm saying. If we got a daily update on # of people who die everyday and tested positive for the flu, the number would seem much higher. Its not like they go back and review each individual case and say "that person died from such and such", they just take into account the probability of (x) number of people dying on average from (x) and take those out to figure out the morbidity rate of the flu for each season.
 
You arent understanding what I'm saying. If we got a daily update on # of people who die everyday and tested positive for the flu, the number would seem much higher. Its not like they go back and review each individual case and say "that person died from such and such", they just take into account the probability of (x) number of people dying on average from (x) and take those out to figure out the morbidity rate of the flu for each season.
I understand what you are saying and it’s not correct. Far fewer than 50k-60k deaths are confirmed positive for influenza. We do have flu tests. For initial count for Covid19 they are using confirmed Covid19 through laboratory or clinical diagnosis. When all is said and done they will revise the total impact up to account for deaths for which there was never a confirmation, but are above the normal number of deaths.
 
I understand what you are saying and it’s not correct. Far fewer than 50k-60k deaths are confirmed positive for influenza. We do have flu tests. For initial count for Covid19 they are using confirmed Covid19 through laboratory or clinical diagnosis. When all is said and done they will revise the total impact up to account for deaths for which there was never a confirmation, but are above the normal number of deaths.

K, we are basically saying the same thing.

Total number of deaths - total number of average deaths = morbidity rate. Its very possible that the death count will actually be higher than what we know now. It's also possible that it will be lower. Its just too early to know yet
 
K, we are basically saying the same thing.

Total number of deaths - total number of average deaths = morbidity rate. Its very possible that the death count will actually be higher than what we know now. It's also possible that it will be lower. Its just too early to know yet
But we already have some data in. We know historically the number of people who die in March/April in NYC. We know we saw 400% of normal deaths for 2020. We know towns in Lombardy Italy saw 400% of normal deaths. Some areas it’s not widespread yet. To get the global picture we have to wait, but we can get localized impacts now.
 
Imagine arguing about maybe 20 cases per day when 2800 are dying. It's irrelevant. There are some that are being over counted and some that are under counted. They aren't testing dead bodies they pull from apartments. It's going to be a statistical wash.
 
Imagine arguing about maybe 20 cases per day when 2800 are dying. It's irrelevant. There are some that are being over counted and some that are under counted. They aren't testing dead bodies they pull from apartments. It's going to be a statistical wash.
It'll probably be further off than 20. NYC is an outlier so probably isn't a good representation of morbidity.
 
Can you really compared NYC deaths? They moved some patients from Pennsylvania as an example. Not sure how these get counted.
Yes you can compare NYC to itself. No you can’t compare it nationally. NYC due to public transport likely has the highest percentage infected in the country. Which is why it is decent data to use for forecasting what would happen if the virus was widespread in other places.
 
I don't like this data so I'm going to look for ways to discount 1% or 2% of it and then use that to disregard the other 99%

Next thing you know they'll be saying that the deaths were double counted because they lived in one county and died in another. By the time we disprove their conspiracy theories they are on the the next one.
 
I don't like this data so I'm going to look for ways to discount 1% or 2% of it and then use that to disregard the other 99%

Next thing you know they'll be saying that the deaths were double counted because they lived in one county and died in another. By the time we disprove their conspiracy theories they are on the the next one.
And after that the Covid19 dead in NYC and California will vote for Biden in the 2020 election. Inevitably giving him the popular vote. Believe me.
 
Yes you can compare NYC to itself. No you can’t compare it nationally. NYC due to public transport likely has the highest percentage infected in the country. Which is why it is decent data to use for forecasting what would happen if the virus was widespread in other places.

For mortality and infection rate in a very unique city, sure. That doesnt translate to the rest of the country though. Even Los Angeles proves that. Its been there for longer than it was in NYC and their numbers are nowhere close and its the 2nd largest city in the country.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT