Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-23-2020, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma
17,700 posts, read 13,559,539 times
Reputation: 17668

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by VA Yankee View Post
OP you do realize that this CDC report is COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios :

CDC and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Responseexternal icon (ASPR) have developed five COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios that are designed to help inform decisions by modelers and public health officials who utilize mathematical modeling.

This is the CDC's version of War Games where different scenarios are evaluated and worked through.
I don't think the OP actually read the CDC link. He just posted the Horowitz article that included that CDC link and assumed it supported Horowitz' claim. Which it didn't. It was sort of random

The more supportive paper (to Horowitz claim) is the Stanford antibody study that they did on residents of Santa Clara. The Stanford study showed that there were a lot more people who had antibodies to COVID who hadn't been tested than they originally thought.

Obviously asymptomatic people don't get tested to near the degree of symptomatic people. Thus the death rate is much lower than

Then Horowitz rightly assumes that the numbers are somewhat skewed by Nursing homes and group living outbreaks.

But the bottom line is that the death rate is roughly 6% for those who have been tested. It probably means that if you are sick enough to have symptoms and get tested your risk of dying is way higher than those who get exposed and don't have symptoms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-23-2020, 05:38 PM
bjh
 
59,952 posts, read 30,275,344 times
Reputation: 135668
From 14:30 to end is as creepy as hell. History trying to repeat itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audie Murphy View Post
This needs to be shared. Mike Wallace on 60 minutes. Should the CDC be trusted?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ture=emb_title
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 05:43 PM
 
Location: Somewhere gray and damp, close to the West Coast
20,957 posts, read 5,530,197 times
Reputation: 8559
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
Where? Where is it well documented that deaths are being under reported? The only places I've seen that are random comments from people like you with no sources. Yet, there are countless sources now that show that deaths are being far over-counted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 05:47 PM
bjh
 
59,952 posts, read 30,275,344 times
Reputation: 135668
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
Where? Where is it well documented that deaths are being under reported? The only places I've seen that are random comments from people like you with no sources. Yet, there are countless sources now that show that deaths are being far over-counted.
If it ever is allowed to come out that the actual death count is easily less than half the declared count there will be crickets (i.e. silence) from the media that drove this panic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 05:49 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,866 posts, read 46,504,056 times
Reputation: 18520
The CDC is trying to get ahead of what is about to be exposed and blown wide open.
It was not about COVID......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 05:50 PM
 
9,329 posts, read 4,124,540 times
Reputation: 8224
I don't know what you mean in the title, "Where is the media?" It's been perfectly obvious to me all along. All you have to do is look at the numbers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Somewhere gray and damp, close to the West Coast
20,957 posts, read 5,530,197 times
Reputation: 8559
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjh View Post
If it ever is allowed to come out that the actual death count is easily less than half the declared count there will be crickets (i.e. silence) from the media that drove this panic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 05:52 PM
 
25,427 posts, read 9,747,465 times
Reputation: 15257
Quote:
Originally Posted by RhodyRepub View Post
The CDC just came out with a report that should be earth-shattering to the narrative of the political class, yet it will go into the thick pile of vital data and information about the virus that is not getting out to the public. For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%. Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.


Until now, we have been ridiculed for thinking the death rate was that low, as opposed to the 3.4% estimate of the World Health Organization, which helped drive the panic and the lockdowns. Now the CDC is agreeing to the lower rate in plain ink.

Plus, ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomaticcases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected.

More importantly, as I mentioned before, the overall death rate is meaningless because the numbers are so lopsided. Given that at least half of the deaths were in nursing homes, a back-of-the-envelope estimate would show that the infection fatality rate for non-nursing home residents would only be 0.1% or 1 in 1,000. And that includes people of all ages and all health statuses outside of nursing homes. Since nearly all of the deaths are those with comorbidities.

The CDC estimates the death rate from COVID-19 for those under 50 is 1 in 5,000 for those with symptoms, which would be 1 in 6,725 overall, but again, almost all those who die have specific comorbidities or underlying conditions. Those without them are more likely to die in a car accident. And schoolchildren, whose lives, mental health, and education we are destroying, are more likely to get struck by lightning.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...scenarios.html
I'm sure the friends and families of the near 100,000 who have already died in this country might disagree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 05:58 PM
 
12,022 posts, read 11,522,798 times
Reputation: 11136
It means the treatment has gotten better. They stopped using ventilators at the beginning of April.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 05:58 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,057 posts, read 26,024,198 times
Reputation: 15524
Quote:
Originally Posted by RhodyRepub View Post
The CDC just came out with a report that should be earth-shattering to the narrative of the political class, yet it will go into the thick pile of vital data and information about the virus that is not getting out to the public. For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%. Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.


Until now, we have been ridiculed for thinking the death rate was that low, as opposed to the 3.4% estimate of the World Health Organization, which helped drive the panic and the lockdowns. Now the CDC is agreeing to the lower rate in plain ink.

Plus, ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomaticcases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected.

More importantly, as I mentioned before, the overall death rate is meaningless because the numbers are so lopsided. Given that at least half of the deaths were in nursing homes, a back-of-the-envelope estimate would show that the infection fatality rate for non-nursing home residents would only be 0.1% or 1 in 1,000. And that includes people of all ages and all health statuses outside of nursing homes. Since nearly all of the deaths are those with comorbidities.

The CDC estimates the death rate from COVID-19 for those under 50 is 1 in 5,000 for those with symptoms, which would be 1 in 6,725 overall, but again, almost all those who die have specific comorbidities or underlying conditions. Those without them are more likely to die in a car accident. And schoolchildren, whose lives, mental health, and education we are destroying, are more likely to get struck by lightning.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...scenarios.html
"The CDC confirms remarkably low coronavirus death rate"?

That link isn't a confirmation, it is an undated prediction from the CDC.




Do you understand the difference between prediction and confirmation and why are you even attempting to dismissthe fact that the disease is overwhelming our country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:09 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top