The Odds of Dying from COVID-19

[Warcodered]

On 8/22/2020 at 9:38 PM, RocCityRoller said:

2.6% of those who test positive for COVID-19 die of COVID-19 and related illnesses. This is @10x higher than the normal flu.

 

But let's put that into perspective

0.23% of those tested for COVID-19 die from it

0.053% of the general population are dying from COVID-19

So this whole op seems like it boils down to this which I mean come on really. Let's translate.

On 8/22/2020 at 9:38 PM, RocCityRoller said:

2.6% of those who test positive for COVID-19 die of COVID-19 and related illnesses. This is @10x higher than the normal flu. -eesh I really don't like that number.

 

But let's put that into perspective-Man I really don't like that ***** number.

0.23% of those tested for COVID-19 die from it-I like this one better.

0.053% of the general population are dying from COVID-19-Man I like this one is even better let's go with it.

So basically let's ignore the first number even though it might really be connected to something because you like the other two numbers even though their essentially completely irrelevant.

[Q-baby!]

100% of the people who died are dead. 

[Gary M]

27 minutes ago, Q-baby! said:

100% of the people who died are dead. 

 

Every living person is dying.

[Niagara Bill]

7 minutes ago, Gary M said:

 

Every living person is dying.

Rather consider the later option rather than sooner option.

[SoCal Deek]

When it comes to Covid 19 it’s very easy to get lost in the weeds of statistics for sure but here’s my ‘big picture’ take after six full months of this health issue ascending to the front page:

 

1. We know a lot more now than we did in late February but there’s still no cure, so people are learning to work and live around it.  The vast majority of Americans have gone back to work and like with most government imposed regulations, the people are finding a way to work and live around them. Nothing to see here....just Americans living their lives!
 

2. The medical profession is on top of their game now and like most other modern health challenges they know what they’re doing. No lack of equipment. No hospitals overrun. Nobody dying in the streets. 

 

3. The virus remains fatal to only a small but well known percentage of the general population; namely those elderly already in poor health. 
 

4. What’s left of Covid 19? A political squabble in an election year with a percentage of the population living in media induced fear (driving alone in their cars with masks on), and the rest of us who’re either choosing to, or forced to, get on with their lives for personal and/or financial reasons.

 

That’s pretty much it. 

[Koko78]

1 hour ago, Gary M said:

 

Every living person is dying.

 

Wait, you mean that life is a terminal condition?!?

[GG]

4 hours ago, Warcodered said:

It's not some magic ***** bullet, but it really doesn't feel that complicated  though I guess it is when you get down into the details. Broadly speaking what was the point of the States shutting down?(Which apparently they had to do themselves for some ***** reason)

 

The point of the shutdown was to slow the spread of the virus and this did two things it helped keep it from overwhelming hospitals in the short term and it gave us time. So what do we need time for I mean we could try and hold out for the vaccine but that was going to take a while and shutting down ***** our economy. The other thing we could do was test the ***** out of the virus until we can get a handle on it and get to the point where we can use testing and contact tracing to wrestle the damn thing down.

 

But we didn't do that we basically held our breath for a while ***** our economy that way and then opened up thinking it was somehow going to be magically better now even though that made no ***** sense.

 

The reopening in many of the Sunbelt states in May followed a major drop in cases in the NE.  In retrospect it was the absolutely correct move, because healthcare system knew much more about the virus and you did not see anything resembling the disaster that unfolded in NY.  There's also no reason that NE should not be fully open at this moment.

[KD in CA]

11 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

When it comes to Covid 19 it’s very easy to get lost in the weeds of statistics for sure but here’s my ‘big picture’ take after six full months of this health issue ascending to the front page:

 

1. We know a lot more now than we did in late February but there’s still no cure, so people are learning to work and live around it.  The vast majority of Americans have gone back to work and like with most government imposed regulations, the people are finding a way to work and live around them. Nothing to see here....just Americans living their lives!
 

2. The medical profession is on top of their game now and like most other modern health challenges they know what they’re doing. No lack of equipment. No hospitals overrun. Nobody dying in the streets. 

 

3. The virus remains fatal to only a small but well known percentage of the general population; namely those elderly already in poor health. 
 

4. What’s left of Covid 19? A political squabble in an election year with a percentage of the population living in media induced fear (driving alone in their cars with masks on), and the rest of us who’re either choosing to, or forced to, get on with their lives for personal and/or financial reasons.

 

That’s pretty much it. 

 

More or less.   If Biden wins, COVID will drop to the #3 story on the nightly news instantly.

[RocCityRoller]

On 8/23/2020 at 8:18 PM, Greybeard said:

            Considering all the work you put into this point, it is unfortunate that you ran off the tracks.  Using your logic, 175,000 people died from Covid over roughly a 6 month period this year.  A quick search says over the last 3 years, roughly 40,000 Americans died in car accidents per year.  Well that's over a year, so we will say for a half year that is 20,000.   So following your logic, over 8 times more people died of Covid than died from Car accidents, for a given amount of time.

         You can't throw the entire population of the US into a statistic and then compare that to other random statistics.   Although in March lots of politicians of both persuasions were doing that to make themselves sound/look good.

 

Hey Greybeard I did provide the link to the 'odds of dying' from the source, just in case I missed something. And since I was trying to make some comparisons we could wrap our heads around in a rational light I took your criticism and wanted to double check on my source, the National Safety Council. I had fact checked them with a few other sources. (most cited the NCS so that did not help)

 

I owe you a debt of gratitude.

 

The odds of dying shown at the end of my post are USA Citizen 'lifetime odds of dying'. That is not what I searched for, and the landing page of the source notes the odds of the 'US Population' dying from 'x'. It sounds like a trivial point, but lifetime vs in a year is very significant. Your numbers on car crashes is correct. 35-45k a year from 2014-2019, that factors out to the lifetime odds I noted and drew a comparison from. I knew then you were right. I looked into their direct source which was a 200+ page dissertation. Buried around page 40 or so, they have annual rates, and lifetime rates. The initial source could have been interpreted as annual odds, but they cited lifetime odds. When they noted a 1:1 odds of death I should have picked up on that point.

 

The info about population, tests, and % vs tested and % vs population I stand by. That all came from the CDC and was in line with Johns Hopkins. I also stand by the magnitude of testing done in the USA in response. I was too eager to point to some comparative odds this early on. We don't know lifetime odds for COVID, which right now would be much higher than a car crash. It's kind of pointless to further murk up any point I was trying to make about relational odds until CDC/ NSC has the full picture for 2020, and then only look at probabilities for deaths only in 2020.

 

Thanks for providing good info I could check on. I'll have to add an edit note in my OP to show those are lifetime odds.

 

And don't think the irony of my crack about stats isn't missed! I'll have to have a shot or two of bourbon before continuing my ANOVA about Alumni Giving, College Major and Age of donor... sigh...

[RocCityRoller]

15 hours ago, Warcodered said:

So this whole op seems like it boils down to this which I mean come on really. Let's translate.

So basically let's ignore the first number even though it might really be connected to something because you like the other two numbers even though their essentially completely irrelevant.

 

Hey Warcodered, I generally like your posts. And yes I drew some bad conclusions. Guilty as charged as above to Greybeard's post. I did draw some fruit juice comparisons (apples and oranges) to lifetime death rates. Guilty as charged. You don't like the tested vs population conclusions I made, even though I went worst case scenario. Fair enough. Those I will defend. I'll use a card analogy to do it.

 

Who has been tested for COVID in the USA? Is it a random sample of the whole population, or a skewed segment of the population?

 

We both know it has been a skewed sample and that it is not random, it's also not unique (1:1). Many people have had multiple tests, often positive, then confirmed negative by antibody testing. Are the false positive results ever removed? No they are not, they just add up, right or wrong, regardless of test type (viral vs antibody). Those counts make the news, never corrected or broken down by type, or frequency of those tested.

 

When tests were in short supply for this new virus who was being tested? Those with symptoms, and those caring for the people with symptoms and positive tests. It was a smart use of limited tests, but those results did not, and do not represent the entire population (symptoms, age, co-morbidity and exposure). Knowing the results of an entire population is called perfect information. That does not exist in the real world. Look at political polling. A sample is drawn and then inferences to the whole population are made. That is what I did, others have done the same..

 

Why do I think the results from the tested sample to date are skewed heavy to COVID(+) results, and are thus 'worst case scenario?'

 

In a full deck of cards lets assume a King or Ace of any suite = a COVID+ test (15%). An Ace of Spades = a COVID Death (2%). Both are higher than actual known results, but it's an analogy. Let's roll with it.

 

If I take six decks of cards (312 cards @1 per 1,000,000 people) and make one Euchre deck of 24 cards (9+ value cards only, one of each suite) and set all of the other cards to the side (NY & NJ approach), and ask you to bet on the odds of you, or any player, drawing a King or higher from the Euchre deck alone, will the odds be higher of drawing a King or Ace in the Euchre deck or the remainder deck?

 

You and I both know that the odds of drawing a King or Ace are much higher in the Euchre only deck. This is akin to drawing conclusions of positive COVID test results from a compromised population (NY/NJ) instead of the entire population. Let's add the positives include viral results, were double tested, and end up negative, but are not removed from the  'positive' count. A biased sample can not be used to extrapolate to an entire population. (why does that sound familiar) But I digress. That is like saying 20% of American soldiers in a war will die = 20% of all Americans in war time will die. It is ridiculous.

 

This is the issue a lot of people have and are voicing. More so now than ever, and I welcome them in asking questions.We should be asking questions because things have gone too far. The media is reporting odds beginning from a stacked deck and government has made intrusive policy from it. All of the 2's to 8's are on the sidelines in the remainder deck, while only some of the 9's to Aces are in the mix making decisions. Meanwhile the Jokers from all the decks are causing havoc. Only now do we realize the 'Jokers' were also shuffled into the deck by 'the casino.' I guess you could say, a lot of policy makers are not playing with a full deck, and jokers are wild. A lot of people are forced to play, but are looking at the rest of the cards on the sideline and asking why the deck seems stacked against them. What is worse is that many of the 'Kings and Aces drawn' were nines and tens in reality (false positives). But the count for false Kings and Aces is never reduced. 'There is always a 'crisis to solve.'

 

The counts the CDC and media keep compiling and stating started from a stacked deck (biased testing those most at risk), and never corrected for dealer error (false positives) or accounted for type. The media keeps telling us to play with the hand dealt to us (restrictions and closures), though the odds were stacked from the beginning. Easy enough to cope with in a secured gated mansion, or a $10 hand of black jack, but secured mansions have private security and black jack is played with a full deck. The COVID game asks players to play with a stacked deck out of fear of the Ace of Spades, and even as you lose you keep playing out of fear. Where does the stacked deck offset the odds of a business closure, home foreclosure, eviction or the unemployment many will have to deal with as a result? Those are only the financial stakes. For a while the game was played with house money ($600 fed stimulus/ week) as long as you bought in and played the COVID game things were cool, you were playing with house money. But the comps have run dry, and the players at the COVID table are few and far between. The casino better have a side bet for a back cover to angry losses when the rules change again, because eventually even that bank will run dry.

 

It is true, there are 5 sets of kings and aces in the unknown pile of cards (unknown sick in the population). We can't forget that, they are the 'sick' among the population. They are mucking around with the 2-8s and other unlucky 9 to Queens. Be smart, wear a mask, if not for yourself then for others. Distance if you can. But let's also remember, a lot of those Kings and Aces are red, positive for past infections, recovered and not current. This is herd immunity. It is also true 5 Aces of Spades lurk in that pile, but that is the draw of life. No one escapes the Ace of Spades over enough time.

 

As more people get tested, the 2-8s will get shuffled into the dealer mix. The odds of the dreaded K-A draw will drop, and so will their power. The counts of hands dealt will go up (tests) but the ratio of K-A draw (positives) will drop.

 

I sad a long time ago in another thread we will see @20,000,000 infected and @200,000 dead. I still stand by it. It's terrible, but 4 yrs of flu compacted into one. Nature gives, and takes away.

 

Swine flu infected over 40,000,000, and killed about 20,000 with barely a peep. Then it disappeared. If someone suggests a virus will disappear they are called a charlatan now.

 

As people question the rules of the emptying COVID table games the rules will change again and we will find out there are two types of testing. Not all Kings and Aces are the same because red kings and aces mean different things than black kings and aces, and some people test for one another or both, so stats get tricky.

 

I am guessing in November if 'the Casino' wins the rules will change again.

Then new the rules will be:

Black King or Ace = sickness, potential death

Red King or Ace = life and health

We have this under control. Continue as you were.

 

Why? https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/testing-in-us.html

 

Black King & Ace:

Viral tests tell you if you currently have an infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. A positive test result means you have an infection.

For more information on viral tests for COVID-19, see our Viral Testing page.

 

Many of theses tests, rushed though FDA guidelines are prone to false negatives, but are reported on daily. False positives are rarely removed from CDC counts, and almost never redacted by media.

 

Red King & Ace:

Antibody blood tests, also called antibody tests, check your blood by looking for antibodies, which show if you had a previous infection with the virus.

For more information on antibody tests for COVID-19, see our Antibody Testing page.

 

this count is never isolated from viral positives, it is counted with the viral 'positives' despite leaning to 'herd immunity' and recovery.

 

The rules to the narrative keep changing, but seemingly in one direction.

Heaven forbid anyone challenging it.

Even the CDC says:

About the Data

• These data are compiled from a number of sources. Not all tests are reported to CDC.
• The number of positive tests in a state is not equal to the number of cases, as one person may be tested more than once

I'd also like to point out CA has the most COVID (+) results with 665k positive results

More than TX, or FL or GA or NY or NJ.

How much time did they have to prepare since WA was the first state in the union to have a COVID breakout in February?

Won't see it on CNN, MSNBC etc.