Jump to content
OnMyWay

Was there a big mistake?

Recommended Posts

I remember when the virus first came out, we discussed this.  IFR vs. CFR.  I'm not sure if we used those terms, but I remember there was a lot of confusion about the fatality rate.  I have not verified what the article claims on the mistake, but it does seem to be possible.

I think there are a lot of valid points raised, and seems to coincide with the current numbers we are seeing.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/500000-covid19-math-mistake-panic/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow.  This is interesting and I wonder if really true?  If so, could we sweep this whole covid under the rug and get back to normal?  I doubt it.  Going to be a long time if ever before many forget this year 2020.  Again, who do we believe with all the finger pointing about this and that?  Oh well, lets see what the next group of experts have to say.:tiphat:

Share this post


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

Oh well, lets see what the next group of experts have to say.:tiphat:

 Do you want a list?  :hystery:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMY,   Not saying it is right or wrong but Have you researched RT?  I just read this link and now has me really wondering.        https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/26/russia-disinformation-rt-nuanced-online-ofcom-fine

Share this post


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

OMY,   Not saying it is right or wrong but Have you researched RT?  I just read this link and now has me really wondering.        https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/26/russia-disinformation-rt-nuanced-online-ofcom-fine

No I did not and I assumed it was British.  I have not read your link in full yet.  Thanks for the info!

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I remember when the virus first came out, we discussed this.  IFR vs. CFR.  I'm not sure if we used those terms, but I remember there was a lot of confusion about the fatality rate.  I have not verified what the article claims on the mistake, but it does seem to be possible.

I think there are a lot of valid points raised, and seems to coincide with the current numbers we are seeing.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/500000-covid19-math-mistake-panic/

I did not know what RT was and thought it was British.  It is Russian, state backed, so this article has to be taken with a LARGE grain of salt.  I will see if I can find out more.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OnMyWay said:

It is Russian, state backed, so this article has to be taken with a LARGE grain of salt

Maybe a salt block?  Actually the article did sound good and make sense.  But being Russian backed media I just have to wonder.

Salt Block – White by DES MOINES FEED & NATURE CENTER

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OnMyWay said:

I did not know what RT was and thought it was British.  It is Russian, state backed, so this article has to be taken with a LARGE grain of salt.  I will see if I can find out more.

So I looked into this Dr. Malcolm Kendrick and there are many opinions that he is a conspiracy nut.  Most are because of his opinions on the impact of cholesterol on heart disease.  They call him a "cholesterol denier" and he has written a book on that subject.  They also discredit hit because he writes op-eds published on RT.

He also advocates low carb diets and since I also think that can be healthy I will not completely dismiss him.  With regard to diet and medicine, we often find out that protocols pushed by governments are not always valid.  It takes skeptics and time to validate or invalidate them. 

I couldn't really pinpoint the "mistake" he highlighted.  However, there were many articles published in Feb / Mar saying the death rate was very high and those are now known to be false.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30244-9/fulltext

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/02/study-72000-covid-19-patients-finds-23-death-rate

Most of the focus back then was on CFR, Case Fatality Rate and the cases counted were almost all from hospitals.  Most people have to feel pretty darn sick before they visit a hospital (at least in the U.S., not in PH).  So you would expect those first CFRs to be high.  

I did come across a good CDC page and it appears they added IFC, Infection Fatality Rate, to their reports, in July.  This page has some good information and explanations, if you are a statistics nerd and don't get bored easily.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

These are 5 scenarios.  Scenario 5 is their best estimate.  Scroll down to table one if you don't want to read.  They have IFR as .0065, which would be 650 deaths out of 100,000 who test positive for the virus.  40%, or 40,000, would never show any symptoms.

This was updated July 10.  I would think those numbers would have dropped even more by now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd be paranoid also if you had a Woodpecker tap out " I'm coming to get you" in morse code. :whistling:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/7/2020 at 6:40 AM, Snowy79 said:

You'd be paranoid also if you had a Woodpecker tap out " I'm coming to get you" in morse code. :whistling:

But sometimes the woodpecker really is coming to get you!

This Woodpecker Will Drill Into Your Skull And Eat Your Brains

 

Edited by earthdome
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...