I refuse to wear a mask

[wiscoaster]

Then, again, maybe the ACTUAL case fatality count ISN'T as bad as has been reported. On the news this morning: if the deaths where someone died WITH Covid-19 were separated out from those that died FROM Covid-19 then the resulting count might be as low as 35,000 --- about the same as an average year of influenza deaths. (Data from CDC)

One example given: an individual that died from a gunshot wound who had previously tested positive some weeks before was required by the local health department to be listed as a Covid cause of death. Ridiculous.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

In my county elderly people that died in hospice have been counted as covid deaths.

 

[roscoe]

Then, again, maybe the ACTUAL case fatality count ISN'T as bad as has been reported. On the news this morning: if the deaths where someone died WITH Covid-19 were separated out from those that died FROM Covid-19 then the resulting count might be as low as 35,000 --- about the same as an average year of influenza deaths. (Data from CDC)

One example given: an individual that died from a gunshot wound who had previously tested positive some weeks before was required by the local health department to be listed as a Covid cause of death. Ridiculous.

334,000 more Americans died in 2020 than in 2019. Still, must just be a coincidence, right?

Preliminary US death statistics show over 3.4 million total deaths in 2020 — at least 20% more deaths than in 2019

Preliminary US death statistics show over 3.4 million total deaths in 2020 — 20% more deaths than in 2019.

usafacts.org

 

[wiscoaster]

334,000 more Americans died in 2020 than in 2019.

As the article reports, 12 percent year-over-year. Barely statistically significant as such things go. And considering the circumstances, with the increases in mortality due to other pandemic-related but not covid-caused mortalities such as suicides, homicides, postponement of preventative health care, etc, entirely understandable and non-remarkable. And one year does not a trend make. Only trends can be statistically significant for causative factor analysis.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

Go to any Walmart, Target or shopping center parking lot. For a half hour or so take note of the of how many severely overweight people you see. On the way home stop at any fast food place and have a cup of coffee while you watch morbidly obese people order the disgusting crap that they are slowly killing themselves with. How many of them do you think can survive even a mild respiratory illness?

 

[Zundfolge]

How many of them do you think can survive even a mild respiratory illness?

Obesity increases the rate of death by 48% ... so that means something like 98% of them will survive it.

 

[roscoe]

As the article reports, 12 percent year-over-year. Barely statistically significant as such things go. And considering the circumstances, with the increases in mortality due to other pandemic-related but not covid-caused mortalities such as suicides, homicides, postponement of preventative health care, etc, entirely understandable and non-remarkable. And one year does not a trend make. Only trends can be statistically significant for causative factor analysis.

Um, 12% in a population of 330 million is not barely statistically significant.

The earlier spike in 2017-2018 was the influenza that hit that winter. It was the worst flu season in 40 years, but nothing compared to COVID. Just in case people think COVID is no worse that the flu.

Excess Deaths Associated with COVID-19

Figures present excess deaths associated with COVID-19 at the national and state levels.

www.cdc.gov

 

[wiscoaster]

Um, 12% in a population of 330 million is not barely statistically significant.

You didn't factor in population increase, so it's actually some lesser percentage than what you quote.

 

[wiscoaster]

Um, 12% in a population of 330 million is not barely statistically significant.

If you really want to impress me with whether or not your number is statistically significant and proves your hypothesis, then get the year-over-year rate of change for 30 year-over-year cycles, average it, and calculate the standard deviation for that average. If the number you posted exceeds that standard deviation result then your number might be statistically significant. If it exceeds twice the standard deviation, then it most certainly is statistically significant. Otherwise, it's just an interesting statistical artifact that proves nothing.

 

[George P]

Then, again, maybe the ACTUAL case fatality count ISN'T as bad as has been reported. On the news this morning: if the deaths where someone died WITH Covid-19 were separated out from those that died FROM Covid-19 then the resulting count might be as low as 35,000 --- about the same as an average year of influenza deaths. (Data from CDC)

One example given: an individual that died from a gunshot wound who had previously tested positive some weeks before was required by the local health department to be listed as a Covid cause of death. Ridiculous.

Because the Feds were paying money to the states for those Covid deaths; it's ALWAYS about money or control or both

 

[roscoe]

If you really want to impress me with whether or not your number is statistically significant and proves your hypothesis, then get the year-over-year rate of change for 30 year-over-year cycles, average it, and calculate the standard deviation for that average. If the number you posted exceeds that standard deviation result then your number might be statistically significant. If it exceeds twice the standard deviation, then it most certainly is statistically significant. Otherwise, it's just an interesting statistical artifact that proves nothing.

Your model is incorrect. But look at the CDC graph above. That is the correct way to do it, incorporating within-year data patterns (weekly), because more people die in certain times of the year. The yellow line represents the +95% confidence interval. And every week in 2020 from April on far outstrips past patterns, meaning statistical significance at .05 (and surely .001).

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

What an idiot.

 

[wiscoaster]

Your model is incorrect.

You claim a 12 percent rate of change year-over-year is statistically significant; I present you with a method (not a "model") to mathematically verify your claim; then you counter with a weekly excess deaths chart? For crying out loud: apples and oranges.

 

[doubleh]

Good Lord, this horse has been beat down to scraps of skin and bone dust and everyone is still arguing without anyone giving an inch. It's time to let the remains of the horse rest in peace and move on to some other argument that no one will give an inch on.

Wear the damn mask or don't. It's up to you.

 

[Zundfolge]

Wear the damn mask or don't. It's up to you.

For the most part you are right, however the pro-mask side is currently in overdrive trying to use the force of social pressure to make you wear the goddamn things whether you like it or not under pain of cancellation ... and is making moves to use the force of the power of The State to put you in jail if you don't.

So we have to keep this fight alive to push back against the petty would-be tyrants.

 

[doubleh]

So we have to keep this fight alive to push back against the petty would-be tyrants.

No argument from me but no one is paying attention to to the few members of this forum. Your actions in public are what counts, not words on here. Also, I would think that most on this particular topic here have developed a sore head from beating it on the wall while beating the horse and nothing has changed from both actions. It's time to let it go and move on. I'm done on the subject. Bye.

 

[Zundfolge]

No argument from me but no one is paying attention to to the few members of this forum. Your actions in public are what counts, not words on here.

Good point, but a forum like this is where you refine your arguments. I'm assuming that those that have taken part in this discussion here are also taking up this argument elsewhere.

 

[roscoe]

You claim a 12 percent rate of change year-over-year is statistically significant; I present you with a method (not a "model") to mathematically verify your claim; then you counter with a weekly excess deaths chart? For crying out loud: apples and oranges.

Sigh. That is because 12% does not represent a single event - it is a summary statistic that represents multiple events over time. That is why the CDC produced the graph and statistical analysis above. My point is that your model would not capture the relevant information. You want a 30-year comparison, but health parameters are changing across the country in a time window that large (medical technology changing, baby boomers getting old, etc.). So I reject your method. So the sorter-window comparison of the CDC is the appropriate one, and it has identified that the increase (which is about 12% aggregated over time) is statistically significant.

But more to the point - are you denying that there was a statistically significant increase in the death rate in the USA during 2020 relative to the past few years? Because that is absurd. And the increase is directly attributable to COVID, which is orders of magnitude worse in medical impact than any past influenza season.

 

[wiscoaster]

...So I reject your method. ...

Well, I was thinking of making it a project today to actually do the math for you using my method, which is an accepted, if simplified, method of demonstrating statistically whether a given event is significant in comparison to its history, but since you reject it out of hand, I don't see why I should waste my time.

Trying to prove your points by data mining and scatter-shooting non-relevant and unlinked but cherry-picked bits and bobs from suspect published material is a waste of your time.

 

[roscoe]

You claim a 12 percent rate of change year-over-year is statistically significant; I present you with a method (not a "model") to mathematically verify your claim; then you counter with a weekly excess deaths chart? For crying out loud: apples and oranges.

And in case people have trouble visualizing just what this increase in death rate over 2020 means, mathematically:

Data: CDC. Fortunately, there is very little I like more than making an Excel graph!

Edited to add: how are these data cherry-picked? And non-relevant?