5 5
gowlerk

covid-19

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

The joke's on you Joe. We are pretty much in agreement on this one.

Crap! Are you sure he doesn't talk smack about you away from here? Not saying he does or would and just because I hear about it doesn't mean I believe it, nor should you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JoeWeber said:

Crap! Are you sure he doesn't talk smack about you away from here? Not saying he does or would and just because I hear about it doesn't mean I believe it, nor should you. 

Everything he says is the TRUTH! dammit! If you disagree I'll go over to Sonic Beef :halo:

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Hip-Hip Hooray!!! The Canadians are fighting each other now. Finally we get some entertainment.

Manitoba used to be the Canadian poster child for responsible covid behavior. Now its among the worst. Somebody was bringing cases in and the Mounties are in charge. Contrary to rumors that they "always get their man". I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Crap! Are you sure he doesn't talk smack about you away from here? Not saying he does or would and just because I hear about it doesn't mean I believe it, nor should you. 

Hard to say. I don't really know anything about him except that he flies a Canadian flag. He may actually be an igloo mate or from my village, but I'm not sure. I'll ask around at the snowmobile dealer if anyone has heard trash talk about me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Westerly said:

I'm advocating we release the vaccine now to anyone who wants it. Yes it will take time to make and I get that, but for everyday we screw around with more testing is another day that thousands will die. In the end the vaccine will get approved eventually anyway and all this waiting will have accomplished is hundreds of thousands that will be dead that otherwise wouldent have been if they were able to get the vaccine out sooner. It will be a case of 'oh, I guess the vaccine WAS safe and effective after all, good thing we made everyone wait for no reason". There is a good reason to test drugs, but sometimes there is a good reason cut corners as well. This is a case where quantity matters more than quality.

Why now? Why not months ago? Why not approve every vaccine candidate that anyone dreams up, before it's even synthesized for the first time?

I'm sure you'd agree that it's possible to approve something *too* early. The FDA is moving this along more quickly than they ever have moved anything along the past. They have all the information and they intend to approve it as soon as the time is right and not a moment later. They operate on all pertinent details, not just "so many people are dyeing every day so we'd better just approve it now". The FDA hasn't approved it yet, and so we can be sure that they think approving it now would be *too* early. Why do you think your information or judgement is superior than that of the FDA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Canada is 11 percent of US pop. This is where i get my info: https://covid19tracker.ca/

So something doesn't jive.

What doesn't jive?

Going off the numbers from your source, CFR = deaths / (deaths + recoveries) = 10,853 / (10,853 + 228,189) = 4.5%

That's worse than the 3.8% depicted on the chart I posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nwt said:

What doesn't jive?

Going off the numbers from your source, CFR = deaths / (deaths + recoveries) = 10,853 / (10,853 + 228,189) = 4.5%

That's worse than the 3.8% depicted on the chart I posted.

Mortality divided into total cases. US v Canada

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Mortality divided into total cases. US v Canada

There's your problem--that isn't how you calculate case fatality rate or anything useful. Total cases includes a bunch of people who will die but haven't done so yet, which throws off the result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nwt said:

There's your problem--that isn't how you calculate case fatality rate or anything useful. Total cases includes a bunch of people who will die but haven't done so yet, which throws off the result.

Thats true but you compare apples to apples. I don't see any US figures for active cases. I use the NYT  https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html

Hospitalized is not the same as unrecovered. It doesn't include self isolation, etc. So total diagnosed cases to total deaths in both countries factored for population ranks them both equally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Thats true but you compare apples to apples. I don't see any US figures for active cases. I use the NYT  https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html

Hospitalized is not the same as unrecovered. It doesn't include self isolation, etc. So total diagnosed cases to total deaths in both countries factored for population ranks them both equally.

The fact that you are calculating them the same way for both countries doesn't imply that it's a useful or meaningful metric, and it's not. Fabricating your own metrics is not a valid substitute for the real ones just because you haven't found them. The chart I showed you is from JHU data, visualized at http://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three kinds of lies. Lies, damned lies, and worst of all statistics. The best place for info on worldwide COVID-19 numbers is here.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

The Johns Hopkins page. And it has been my go to since the beginning. Case fatalities? death rates? whatever. The bottom line is the US seems to have 244K deaths and Canada a little less than 11K. With roughly a 1/10 the population. Canada is doing poorly, the US is doing twice as poorly. The difference in the case fatality rate is most likely due to the ages of the people getting sick. The US is allowing it to run rampantly through the young population. But it isn't really a contest.

Edited by gowlerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

Three kinds of lies. Lies, damned lies, and worst of all statistics. The best place for info on worldwide COVID-19 numbers is here.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

The Johns Hopkins page. And it has been my go to since the beginning. Case fatalities? death rates? whatever. The bottom line is the US seems to have 244K deaths and Canada a little less than 11K. With roughly a 1/10 the population. Canada is doing poorly, the US is doing twice as poorly. The difference in the case fatality rate is most likely due to the ages of the people getting sick. But it isn't really a contest.

Right. I don't mean to imply that the US is doing well--it clearly isn't. I was merely responding to the idea that Canada had a better CFR and maybe that meant it's healthcare system is doing a better job at treating the disease. I merely intend to point out that the US has a better CFR than Canada and stop there without any further interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, nwt said:

The fact that you are calculating them the same way for both countries doesn't imply that it's a useful or meaningful metric, and it's not. Fabricating your own metrics is not a valid substitute for the real ones just because you haven't found them. The chart I showed you is from JHU data, visualized at http://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/

I'm not "fabricating my own metrics". That is a good site although US v Canada at 30 days post hospitalization is more useful:

 

3 minutes ago, nwt said:

Right. I don't mean to imply that the US is doing well--it clearly isn't. I was merely responding to the idea that Canada had a better CFR and maybe that meant it's healthcare system is doing a better job at treating the disease. I merely intend to point out that the US has a better CFR than Canada and stop there without any further interpretation.

The US is .998 Canada 1.12 of course Canada spends a fraction on care v the US.

 

Edited by Phil1111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nwt said:

Right. I don't mean to imply that the US is doing well--it clearly isn't. I was merely responding to the idea that Canada had a better CFR and maybe that meant it's healthcare system is doing a better job at treating the disease. I merely intend to point out that the US has a better CFR than Canada and stop there without any further interpretation.

Agreed. The US is capable of looking after most covid patients at this level of infections. As is Canada with ours. It isn't actually high tech medicine for the most part. If one or the other healthcare systems begin faltering at this it will be because it will have become over whelmed by too many cases. Which is likely to happen at least locally in some places soon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

Manitoba used to be the Canadian poster child for responsible covid behavior. Now its among the worst. Somebody was bringing cases in and the Mounties are in charge. Contrary to rumors that they "always get their man". I doubt it.

Maybe we should check around to see if there are any somebodies who are going back and forth between Manitoba and the plague stricken upper mid-west. More breadcrumbs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

Maybe we should check around to see if there are any somebodies who are going back and forth between Manitoba and the plague stricken upper mid-west. More breadcrumbs.

Back in June when we could count daily new cases on the fingers of one hand, and sometimes no fingers, there were 2 or 3 cases traced back to long distance cross border trucking. But what really started us going with larger numbers is when some Hutterites from colonies with leaders who choose to believe that the lord will take care or them decided to attend a very large funeral in Alberta. It quickly spread to many colonies and into some of the Mennonite community as well. That seems to have seeded us and then complacency and younger people being tired of no parties spread it. 

Steinbach is still a hot spot and it will be the site of a "anti-mask" demonstration tomorrow. Led of course by a pastor who is infuriated by the new orders forcing churches to close their doors. Steinbach is the capitol of the Mennonite religion in Manitoba and possibly Canada. And it is currently the Covid capital of Canada as well. Another reason I have no respect for religious leaders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Back in June when we could count daily new cases on the fingers of one hand, and sometimes no fingers, there were 2 or 3 cases traced back to long distance cross border trucking.

They always give themselves away, no? So, what was in those cases you were bringing back, Ken? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

They always give themselves away, no? So, what was in those cases you were bringing back, Ken? 

Most often Crown Royal that I buy cheap at the duty free then bring it to Gimli so I can pass it around 2 miles from where it was distilled. Or parachute parts that I pick up at a parcel service to save on shipping and taxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2020 at 10:38 PM, billvon said:

Good example.  Solution?  We get people to wear seatbelts.  We have politicians urge people to do it.  We have fines for people who don't do it.  And it works - seatbelt use is up to 86%.

If everyone wore a mask AND distanced AND improved hygiene - it would absolutely be enough.  Re would go below 1 and the pandemic would die out.  Add testing/tracing and it would die out very quickly.


 

Yep, but that will never happen.

This is where the government should step in. People want less government. Okay, I can make that super easy. The government doesent impose ANY restrictions except just one--anytime the infection rate climbs above 7.5% in a city, that city will order a shutdown for a minimum of two weeks or until the infection rate falls below 7.5%, whichever is longer. So let the market decide. Take shit seriously and stay open or say screw it, have shutdown after shutdown and kill the economy through your own doing. That's both minimum government and sufficient government to keep people safe all at the same time..

Do that and I think everyone including all businesses will suddenly be a lot more motivated to not get sick which collectively solves this problem of people not caring. Either that or the unemployment rate is going to be 30% and we can learn the hard way.

Edited by Westerly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Westerly said:

This is where the government should step in. People want less government. Okay, I can make that super easy. The government doesent impose ANY restrictions except just one--anytime the infection rate climbs above 7.5% in a city, that city will order a shutdown for a minimum of two weeks or until the infection rate falls below 7.5%, whichever is longer. So let the market decide. 

7.5%?  As in 7.5% of people get new infections every day?  (easy to measure)  Or 7.5% people total have infections? (very hard to measure)

But let's go with the easy to measure number with a more realistic threshold, like 8 per 100,000 people new infections per day.  That's what California has done.

Quote

Do that and I think everyone including all businesses will suddenly be a lot more motivated to not get sick which collectively solves this problem of people not caring.

Oh, I think they'll just get mad at the government.  (Which is what's happening here.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, billvon said:

7.5%?  As in 7.5% of people get new infections every day?  (easy to measure)  Or 7.5% people total have infections? (very hard to measure)

But let's go with the easy to measure number with a more realistic threshold, like 8 per 100,000 people new infections per day.  That's what California has done.

Oh, I think they'll just get mad at the government.  (Which is what's happening here.)

7.5% positivity rate. Percentage of positive tests relative to negative. That's been the golden standard for determining severity of spread in the USA. They can go ahead and get mad. The government doesert require you like it. People also got mad at the gov. for making them wear a seatbelt.

Edited by Westerly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Westerly said:

7.5% positivity rate. Percentage of positive tests relative to negative. That's been the golden standard for determining severity of spread in the USA. They can go ahead and get mad. The government doesert require you like it. People also got mad at the gov. for making them wear a seatbelt.

Westerly,

As brazen and combative as you are when you post here, in the spirit of full disclosure and basic human honesty, and out of fairness would you please be so kind as to fill out your profile? Or, if you really have a pair, tell us your name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, nwt said:

There's your problem--that isn't how you calculate case fatality rate or anything useful. Total cases includes a bunch of people who will die but haven't done so yet, which throws off the result.

It's your problem. In a discussion on how well different countries have fared in suppressing the spread of the virus, case fatality rate is useless and irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

5 5