tdhoosier

Interesting question. I can’t find any stats for deaths of despair....just theories that they could spike. Most of these articles from March and April. While I don’t doubt they are up, perhaps the federal assistance helped subside this. That $600 was big; a lot of people were making more in unemployment than the job they were laid off from. Interestingly enough, I’ve theorized in previous pages that auto accidents were way down during the lockdown, but I was completely wrong. In March, April and May they were actually up. In May they were up 23%. Isn’t that crazy? I guess open roads allow you to speed, which make auto accidents that much more fatal. My mother in law who was an ER nurse said that they always received the most patients from auto accidents on clear sunny days. I guess people just get a little too comfortable behind the wheel in safer conditions. Do you guys think there’s any possibility that deaths have been under-counted? I’m not saying it accounts for all the excessive deaths. But many of the unaccounted excess deaths spiked in NYC in April. (Per that JAMA study Reacher posted) There was definitely a shortage in testing back then.

Per the article: “in public places where it's not possible to maintain six feet of social distancing.” You should be fine on a trail.

https://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/gov-holcomb-imposes-statewide-face-mask-requirement-begins-monday/article_3d25bf6f-56af-5e0f-89ed-ff8303509313.html#utm_campaign=blox&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social Indiana state-wide mask mandate begins Monday.

Funny, yesterday we were talking about a vaccine and The Daily had a podcast about this yesterday as well. A good listen if you have the time. The guest being interviewed does bring up the concerns about vaccines, but she really doesn't get into answering why we don't need to be concerned about side effects in relation to accelerating the development, which is what I really wanted to hear about. She did say 75% would need to take the vaccine for it to become effective, but polls say 50% of the population have reservations about getting it. ......So that's a circle we gotta square. Also, separate thought.....we obviously can't get everybody on the same page in regards to mask-wearing which is relatively a simple request (it only being a piece of fabric you put in front of your face). What is going to happen when a vaccine is made available? That exact same message used to encourage mask-wearing ("it's for the greater good") will be the same for vaccination. If people don't want a piece of cloth over their face in the name of liberty, they definitely won't want an injection in their arm.

fixed it for you. haha I thought that seemed a little expensive. It made me think of Dr. Evil.

Well, hopefully the vaccine that works is one they have already started to produce. I think Moderna has already started producing 300 million doses so we can avoid this exact situation. But if the government controls the rollout because we don't have enough doses, then the elderly and those with underlying health issues should get it. ...And of course the rich, NBA basketball players, @bluegrassIU’s third nipple, and politicians because they are more important than us. 🤔 We actually better hope that China doesn't develop the only working vaccine. I have a feeling we'll be pretty low on their list of who to roll it out to.

I'm only skeptical about this particular vaccine as they've fast-tracked 4-5 times faster than any other vaccine ever created. But that said, I'm completely on the fence. If I get a satisfactory explanation that it is safe, by an expert I trust, then i'm all on board. I'm friendly with a general doctor, a pharmacist and a pathologist....I may just ask them straight up are they plan on getting one and follow their lead. They'll know more than I ever know.

That's hot.

Maybe because they haven't started testing in animals yet and you have idiots out there drinking bleach? haha. No doubt great news. I also really want to see something like this make it market and limit our dependency on vaccines. I'm by no means an antivaxer, I get flu shots pretty regularly. Granted I know little to nothing about vaccine development, but I just don't understand how they can possibly know if there are any long term side effects to a vaccine if it only takes 9 months to create. Most vaccines take 5-10 years to thoroughly research. Are they just adapting it from an existing formula already deemed safe that was made to fight other coronaviruses? I'm definitely lacking knowledge in this area and need to learn more.

That's the graph for the JAMA study you referred me to. To the right of the text you can click on "figures and tables". edit: they also have charts broken down by state. NYC accounted for a majority of these unreported excessive deaths while they were in the thick of it. Maybe too many people dying too quickly that they couldn't all be tested and counted? Just a wild guess.

Either way it wasn't really that well written. Initially I was just going on straight excessive deaths from the CDC. I actually thought that the study implied we missed COVID deaths because where would those unapplied extra deaths come from? Whereas, the dotted line represents 'expected deaths' (or averages based on previous years), the solid represents actual deaths reported and the space between is the excessive deaths. They're saying the blue shaded area is reported COVID deaths and the tan area is unreported excess deaths. The tan area was thickest during the NYC chaos, a result of the virus taking them by surprise and them being unprepared. I read the study to imply that some of that tan area should also be COVID, thus under-reported. Again, I'm not sure how you found this study so I can't vouch for its accuracy in either direction. Interesting though, this study also factored in that orange sliver, which represents additional pneumonia and influenza excess deaths not coded as COVID-19. I've been hearing conspiracy theories that we all together stopped counting flu once COVID started, which this data show is not true. It actually seemed to be a pretty bad spring for the flu if deaths climbed over the median.

So what you're saying is we could possibly be under-reporting COVID deaths now? Did I read that right? Haha. The excessive mortality reports are interesting. That's how they eventually measured the death toll from the Earthquake in Haiti. Eventually it will also be how we learn a better estimation to the COVID death toll in Russia, China and Brazil. (I actually do believe that China has low numbers - I've been reading some articles. They have some crazy Orwellian crap going on over there.) Edit: Another interesting thing I read since we are talking about total mortality was that deaths caused by automobile accidents were way down in April and may because people obviously weren't driving as much. Not sure if that offsets anything in particular but I read a lot of suicides were up during the same period. Take the good with the bad, I guess.

We're going at this backwards. If one makes the allegation that we're off 10,000 in the death toll then the burden of proof is on them to prove otherwise. I'm going by the generally accepted stats. One can only prove a specific negative claim by providing contradictory evidence, none of which has been found. The closest we've come to this is cherry picking unrepresentative anomalies. You saying 'we don't know what the numbers are' or 'something seems fishy' is not evidence to any claim....it just casts doubt at this particular point in time. And doubt is starting to become dangerous because it's being used as an excuse to not wear a mask or not avoid high risk areas, which fuels R. I really think we all need to be more conscience and recognize when or if we are propagating doubt without any evidence to the contrary. And I mean this on all sides of the issue. I have probably have been guilty of this myself in the past. That said, I think I'm basing my beliefs on more than just assumptions. I don't know how much clearer you can get when looking at the excessive death rate over the 5 year median. The only people I hear disputing the figures are either politicians, pundits and economists. None of whom, have any expertise in this particular field of measuring deaths caused by viruses. Sure you may find a statement from a scientist somewhere that doesn't completely agree with the majority of his/her peers, but if 9 out of 10 dentists say brushing your teeth is good.....then I'm going to brush my teeth. P.S. Tone gets lost in text. Just wanted to be clear, I wasn't 'shooting the messenger' in my response, I was genuinely wondering about the path the miami story took, because I also saw it on my FB feed too. I appreciate you bro!

Not disagreeing. Good examples. The over-reporting of children's deaths as a reason not to open schools came to my mind while I was writing that sentence.

100% agree. EXACTLY the point I was going to make. Anomalies are being weaponized. It gets me furious. But who's weaponizing them? I'm not excusing the idiots making these errors (whether intentionally or unintentionally), but these instances are also being unproportionately over-reported. And they are being shared. It's a never ending cycle. How did a local news story from Miami make it on to this board? Is a national media outlet reporting on the reporting? Did it start trending on Twitter? Just curious @Reacher, how did you find out about this? I'm guessing you don't make a regular habit of perusing the local Miami news stories. haha. We aren't going to stop every instance of mis-reporting a death case, but this headline is misleading and irresponsible because it feeds into a conspiracy theory people are using as an excuse not to be socially responsible. "Doubts about accuracy of COVID-19 death numbers continue as man’s death wrongly attributed to virus." Continue? On what scale? Doubts? Whose doubts? Nowhere in the story did they report other mis-represented cases or expand on this allegation. That headline alone leads people to believe that there is a systemic problem. It seems like in the end we agree that this crap is unnecessary. But if it is, then why is it being reported on this heavily? When it comes to creating the mistrust prevalent in our society, can you agree that the anomaly is the spark, and the reporting of these anomalies (as if they are representative) is the accelerant?

Again, and i can't say this enough, it's not a matter of me believing what was published, but this is one case. Cherry picking anomalies from random places across the country paints a picture that there is a systematic problem of the data being gathered, when there's not. I don't understand the motives behind this particular case either. Maybe it was a mistake. Maybe it was an unethical decision. But in the end how much does it matter? This in 1 out of 135k+ cases. You can assume it happens more than once....and that is a fair assumption. But how much are we talking? 10 times? 100 times? 1,000 times? 10,000 times? At what number do you draw the line to conclude there a systemic reporting problem? If you think it happened a couple of hundred times is it something we really need to worry about? I'm not disputing that we shouldn't fix these cases or prevent them from happening, but it doesn't change the overall narrative. I posted an excessive death chart a few pages back....and overall deaths are way up over the 5 year median since March. The excessive deaths (increases in death over the 5 year average) add up very closely to the COVID deaths being reported. Being that there wasn't a catastrophic earthquake since March, I think it's safe to assume these overages can be attributed to COIVD. If the excessive death figures generally back up the death count, it leads me to believe that the anomalies, are in fact, anomalies. Are the deaths being reported 100% accurate? No. It's impossible. But if they are off, say, 2% does that make this virus significantly less deadly in the grand scheme of things? Or change how we should deal with it?

It’s just a file photo and it was cited as that in the article. refrigerated trucks were still requested. No need to get worked up.

Going to show my beer snob colors here.... 60-80% of our taste comes through our sense of smell. Bottles are the absolute worst, cans are better, poured into a glass is the best because you can get your nose all up in it and inhale the aroma. For some reason I’m getting thirsty now.

Ironically all those factors are what make Bloomington a great college town.

I think it’s more so for the teachers and other employees but I totally agree. I know I always seem to be the cautious one on here, but I think it’s a little ridiculous that we are looking at this on a national or even state level. If cases are high in a particular area then by all means temporarily close schools until the case count is lower. Every district will be different. And not only are children less likely to get COVID and develop severe symptoms, more and more studies Acknowledged by the CDC are finding they are less likely to transmit it. I listen a lot to Donald McNeil, who’s pretty doom and gloom (but very often right), and he even says that teachers in school need to take precautions around other teachers, not necessarily the kids. I have some teacher friends who I very much respect that are weary about going back and I completely get that. I want to remind them that everybody, in every profession is dealing with this too and their jobs are more challenging as a result. Teachers aren’t being singled out. They may feel that they are being treated unfairly or have limited say in the decision, but so are people in other professions. It’s not necessarily right; it’s just the reality of our situation right now. Schools are a vital cog in our way life and when school starts teachers need to be as high up on that pedestal of appreciation as nurses, doctors and other first responders.

I'll take a stab at it. These are some things that I'd personally like to see from here on out: States completely ignored the federal government's suggestions and opened up early. Look at the position those states are in now. I feel at the very least we should learn from this. Don't necessarily need to point fingers, but learn and plan accordingly. Put as many resources behind testing as possible. Testing quickly and accurately is the key to contact tracing. Contact tracing (*that keeps privacy intact) should be the number one goal for this country because it allows the economy to re-open safely and almost completely. This goal should be as clear and as widespread as 'we are putting a man on the moon'. A contact tracing program should be ready to go, the second the testing is able to accommodate it. Just like many school systems are doing, put a 3 tiered plan into place, county by county, nationwide: Green (safe), Orange (take precautions), Red (dangerous). This way Santa Clause, Indiana isn't shutting things down based on numbers in Houston. Not only is this clear, it gives communities incentives to keep their spread lower. If in 'green' kids can go to school, we can go to the gym, eat outside at restaurants, etc. If a county slips to orange then extra precautions will need to be taken, but there will at least be an incentive to get things back to 'green'. I really feel like this would unite communities, get more people involved locally and keep R under control. The other things i can't say or @Hoosierhoopster will make me sit in the corner. 😀 I'm happy to PM you though @IUFLA.

Well, If somebody who has cancer gets the flu and dies, it's counted as a flu death. But why are we focusing on these anomalies? How many people who get into a car accident are asymptomatic with COVID? 2? 2 out of 135,000? If states want to change the way the report these outlier deaths then fine.....take them off the books. My point is, again, removing these outliers is not going to magically lower the death toll by tens of thousands and change the way we deal with the virus.

You can take that stance but in the end aren't you just arguing over crumbs? Why waste the energy, the overall narrative is not changed? Nobody disputes that there are outliers, but overall the increase of death when compared to previous springs approximately adds up to the cases being reported. The numbers reported aren't perfect but they don't seem that far off.....even with all these theories of hospitals or the department of health mis-representing numbers. You can pull all the articles you want. I'm not dismissing that there may be some bad actors or odd cases, but again, it doesn't affect the overall picture. It doesn't imply that the theory of misrepresenting deaths is systematic. There were approximately 125k 'non expected deaths' (based on previous years averages) since mid March - July 1. As of July 1 there were approximately 125k reported Covid deaths. Now, if the difference was off 50k, I'd say you have a point and this is something to be concerned about, but it's not. In this instance I think that outliers are being unproportionally magnified and used as ammunition to paint the whole system as corrupt.

How else do you suggest we do it? If you think there are minor disputes about what is and isn't a case now, what do you think it will look like when we leave cases open for interpretation? What if somebody with heart disease got COVID and it accelerated the symptoms, which caused his death. One doctor may say before COVID he only had 3 months live, so he doesn't think we should count it. Another doctor says that he had 1 year to live and we should have counted it as COVID. It would cause a huge mess. We are recording data and data needs to be binary. Context can be provided and should be welcome, but we need to have an accurate baseline to base the context off of. In regards to your question, I leave that up to scientists. But most polls have an error rate of +/- 3% and generally give us a pretty clear picture to what is going on. A 3% error rate is about 4,000 cases. I have not seen nearly that many called into question so far. Furthermore, the overall gross number of deaths since March is WAY higher than the average of the 5 previous years' deaths over the same span. So it's definitely not a 'ploy'....something is adding to that death total. Look at the chart below from the CDC. Compare those numbers with previous springs and you get pretty darn close to a 130k overage. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm