What a positive COVID-19 test REALLY means

When you get to the final phase, your numbers will rise. IL just hit the final phase 10 days ago. Guess what. The case numbers are rising.

no way to stop this thing. Have to figure out how to live with it.

And that’s the key. We have been sucked into this false narrative that this virus is so deadly that we have to take extreme measures to deal with it. And those pushing the narrative are telling us we will continue down this path until the virus is either eradicated or a virus is developed, which in reality may be never.
 
Why are you putting words in my mouth I did not say and not answering the question. Because you can't.

Are you really calling the BS that Fauci has spouted "science"? Thanks for proving my point, there are no peer reviewed studies on C-19...

I am out with this comment Henry. Lets go boating my friend...

Hes trolling you. Hit “ignore”. Don’t waste your time. They’ll figure out the truth the hard way.
 
Ok, let me readjust the number even higher. So it should be 99.9% or so.

Thanks for pointing out that it is even less lethal. ;)
That would mean 330,000 deaths. BTW, I wasn't trying to make an estimate of lethality. If I was, I would say it is between .5% and 1%, which seems to be the current medical consensus. See
How deadly is the coronavirus? Scientists are close to an answer
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01738-2
As the article describes, getting to the actual rate is hard and estimates will get better as more is known. But, according to this, your original estimate was fairly close to the mark if not a little low. In other words, between 1.5 and 3 million deaths if the virus is allowed to run unimpeded, which were the numbers cited by the President when he shut down the economy. Let's hope the mortality rate is indeed getting lower over time. But, as of now, it seems prudent to be cautious regardless of political leaning.
 
That would mean 330,000 deaths. BTW, I wasn't trying to make an estimate of lethality. If I was, I would say it is between .5% and 1%, which seems to be the current medical consensus. See
How deadly is the coronavirus? Scientists are close to an answer
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01738-2
As the article describes, getting to the actual rate is hard and estimates will get better as more is known. But, according to this, your original estimate was fairly close to the mark if not a little low. In other words, between 1.5 and 3 million deaths if the virus is allowed to run unimpeded, which were the numbers cited by the President when he shut down the economy. Let's hope the mortality rate is indeed getting lower over time. But, as of now, it seems prudent to be cautious regardless of political leaning.

The lethality is much lower. And the data being used is highly flawed, because once again, there isn’t a single standard being used across the country. A person that gets killed in an accident, and the autopsy shows Covid positive, is not a death from Covid. This is but one small example.
 
Just show me the studies that back up the tin pot dictators regulations which is the topic. Jeezzz...
Follow the reference links in this article for a wealth of peer-reviewed studies of mask efficacy, risk of transmission in indoor spaces and workplace setting risks among others, all of which can and should inform and support the decisions of the states and localities.
The Risks - Know Them - Avoid Them
https://www.erinbromage.com/post/th...te=1&user_id=1cce7baa9a97b1605e75a5e5d9b6d596
 
The lethality is much lower. And the data being used is highly flawed, because once again, there isn’t a single standard being used across the country. A person that gets killed in an accident, and the autopsy shows Covid positive, is not a death from Covid. This is but one small example.
Aside from anecdotes, I have not seen evidence of wide-spread over- or mis- counting of covid deaths. In fact, the evidence I have seen is the opposite, that covid deaths are being undercounted.
See https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-covid-19-deaths-are-counted1/ for a description of how covid deaths are counted as well as evidence of under-counting.
"How COVID-19 Deaths Are Counted
Assigning a cause of death is never straightforward, but data on excess deaths suggest coronavirus death tolls are likely an underestimate"

Also see: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
Excess Deaths Associated with COVID-19
Provisional Death Counts for Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19)
These estimates were derived by statistical methods and show at least 20K excess deaths over and above those documented as covid.
 
Follow the reference links in this article for a wealth of peer-reviewed studies of mask efficacy, risk of transmission in indoor spaces and workplace setting risks among others, all of which can and should inform and support the decisions of the states and localities.
The Risks - Know Them - Avoid Them
https://www.erinbromage.com/post/th...te=1&user_id=1cce7baa9a97b1605e75a5e5d9b6d596

Quotes from the linked article. A very nice article that people should read to understand how we can spread all manor of things, but not a guide for the government to take freedoms from the people.

"it appears that"

"Some experts estimate"

"Please note, this still needs to be determined experimentally"

"we can use that number to demonstrate how infection can occur"

"We don't have a number for SARS-CoV2 yet"

"we can use influenza as a guide"

Wait!!! What was that? I thought it was not the flu! I have been chastised for saying it was like a serious flu...
 
Your favorite government agency speculated the infection rate is 10x current numbers of positive tests.

I would agree.

What does that do to fatality rate? ...given all the speculation by many here.
Good point. The fatality rate based on the current numbers is 4.1% (137K/3.3M). If all infections magically stopped today, the rate would go up as deaths from the previously infected occur, so the rate is a little low.
The only way to achieve an ultimate fatality rate in the 1% or lower range is to assume there are large numbers of uncounted cases. So, if actual cases are 10X the current number of cases counted, then the fatality rate would be .041%. That would equate to 1.37 million deaths if applied to the total population.
Another way to look at it is, if Capt Ronn's scenario of a .01% fatality rate is accurate, then 137 million Americans have been infected, which seems high. I wish that were true as it would put us pretty close to herd immunity.
 
This is the crap that make me have no trust in so called news and experts. PHD or not.

“An NBC medical expert who was brought on air nearly a dozen times to detail his struggle with COVID-19 never had the virus, he revealed this week.

After believing he had the coronavirus in spite of getting negative tests, virologist and NBC News science contributor Dr. Joseph Fair tweeted Tuesday that he had tested negative for the antibodies and that the illness that hospitalized him in May "remains an undiagnosed mystery."

https://freebeacon.com/media/nbc-co...avirus-after-network-documented-his-recovery/


CBS used a photo of an Italian hospital because in NY, the supposed epicenter, they could not find a scary enough picture to use.
 
Quotes from the linked article. A very nice article that people should read to understand how we can spread all manor of things, but not a guide for the government to take freedoms from the people.

"it appears that"

"Some experts estimate"

"Please note, this still needs to be determined experimentally"

"we can use that number to demonstrate how infection can occur"

"We don't have a number for SARS-CoV2 yet"

"we can use influenza as a guide"

Wait!!! What was that? I thought it was not the flu! I have been chastised for saying it was like a serious flu...
Glad you liked the article, but as I said, I posted it not for its primary content (which I agree is interesting and useful) but provide links to peer-reviewed covid-19 research relevant to making public health policies.

For example, https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-0764_article is relevant to regulating restaurant opening, ventilation standards and diner spacing.

Also, https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/8/20-1274_article provides research that could inform targeted preventive strategies for workplace openings.

And, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e1.htm?s_cid=mm6915e1_w

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e1.htm?s_cid=mm6915e1_w gives evidence to support social distancing and gathering size restrictions.

The above is from about 1/2 way through the paper but you're welcome to keep looking...

Your remark about flu actually highlights a current argument regarding airborne transmission. As you say, the author of the article used a documented influenza parameter in lieu of a covid number for the level of virus transmitted as back in May when he wrote it, the studies on covid had not been done. The answer seems to be that covid is worse than influenza in this regard. See https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02058-1.

Not sure who dumped on you about referencing flu, but I don't see why using factors that influenza and covid have in common is a problem. That's not to say that covid and influenza are the same thing, which would be entirely wrong.
 
For example, https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-0764_article is relevant to regulating restaurant opening, ventilation standards and diner spacing.

The problem with that study is that it is basically an educated guess. One thing it didn't mention is how the droplets aerosolized and spread. Was the suspect coughing and/or sneezing? Was it just talking? Breathing? If he guy was hacking up a lung it would be much different than simply eating.
 
Glad you liked the article, but as I said, I posted it not for its primary content (which I agree is interesting and useful) but provide links to peer-reviewed covid-19 research relevant to making public health policies.

For example, https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-0764_article is relevant to regulating restaurant opening, ventilation standards and diner spacing.

Also, https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/8/20-1274_article provides research that could inform targeted preventive strategies for workplace openings.

And, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e1.htm?s_cid=mm6915e1_w

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e1.htm?s_cid=mm6915e1_w gives evidence to support social distancing and gathering size restrictions.

The above is from about 1/2 way through the paper but you're welcome to keep looking...

Your remark about flu actually highlights a current argument regarding airborne transmission. As you say, the author of the article used a documented influenza parameter in lieu of a covid number for the level of virus transmitted as back in May when he wrote it, the studies on covid had not been done. The answer seems to be that covid is worse than influenza in this regard. See https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02058-1.

Not sure who dumped on you about referencing flu, but I don't see why using factors that influenza and covid have in common is a problem. That's not to say that covid and influenza are the same thing, which would be entirely wrong.

Interesting info here but this really gets to the heart of what I am discussing. This was an investigation of an incident in a restaurant. It is not replicatable as a genuine study presented for peer review and is missing important data points by the authors admission.

My main point is no one should be restricting the freedoms of individuals and businesses without concrete data. I’m all for getting this info out and letting the people work it out.

I am terrified of contact tracing and the Pandora’s box it opens. There are forces that want this type of surveillance from the Chinese communist party to Google. The slippery slope this has started will be exploited again as it was so easy.

Who decides what is worthy of shutdowns, lockdowns, business and personal disruptions,? Humans commonly carry and breathe that which may be deadly to some. Why do we take drastic measures for some but not all?

There are huge questions that deserve answers, to be discussed by our representatives not be edicts by governors or worse unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats...
 
Interesting info here but this really gets to the heart of what I am discussing. This was an investigation of an incident in a restaurant. It is not replicatable as a genuine study presented for peer review and is missing important data points by the authors admission.

My main point is no one should be restricting the freedoms of individuals and businesses without concrete data. I’m all for getting this info out and letting the people work it out.

I am terrified of contact tracing and the Pandora’s box it opens. There are forces that want this type of surveillance from the Chinese communist party to Google. The slippery slope this has started will be exploited again as it was so easy.

Who decides what is worthy of shutdowns, lockdowns, business and personal disruptions,? Humans commonly carry and breathe that which may be deadly to some. Why do we take drastic measures for some but not all?

There are huge questions that deserve answers, to be discussed by our representatives not be edicts by governors or worse unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats...
Looks like you are confusing peer review with "levels of evidence". Virtually all material in professional journals is peer-reviewed, like the restaurant study. Level of evidence classifies the quality and amount of evidence. This pyramid typically is used to visualize the concept:
Level_of_evidence_pyramid.jpg


The higher on the pyramid, the better the evidence. It narrows because there is less evidence available at the top. Something like the restaurant study is likely the best evidence that can be gotten about direct infection behavior a randomized controlled trial that deliberately infected some individuals would not make sense or be ethical. When at war, waiting for perfect intelligence before doing anything is a recipe for defeat. Best evidence available at any given time needs to be used at the individual and government levels in my opinion. This is a moving target in the current situation, much like intelligence in wartime.

Contract tracing has been done for centuries and doesn't seem to have a history of rights abuse or am I missing something? I'm not terrified, just watchful, about the government response. Maybe I've spent too much time in and around the military, where one willingly gives up lots of rights for something of a higher purpose. I personally think the slippery slope argument is over-used by individuals of every political persuasion to object to nearly any change of any kind.

Unfortunately, we've got to go with the government we've got, not the one we'd like. I think politicians on both sides have stepped up and done pretty well while a few seem to be floundering. A crisis tends to expose the best and worst of officials. I believe this will get sorted out on election day.
 
Looks like you are confusing peer review with "levels of evidence". Virtually all material in professional journals is peer-reviewed, like the restaurant study. Level of evidence classifies the quality and amount of evidence. This pyramid typically is used to visualize the concept:
Level_of_evidence_pyramid.jpg


The higher on the pyramid, the better the evidence. It narrows because there is less evidence available at the top. Something like the restaurant study is likely the best evidence that can be gotten about direct infection behavior a randomized controlled trial that deliberately infected some individuals would not make sense or be ethical. When at war, waiting for perfect intelligence before doing anything is a recipe for defeat. Best evidence available at any given time needs to be used at the individual and government levels in my opinion. This is a moving target in the current situation, much like intelligence in wartime.

Contract tracing has been done for centuries and doesn't seem to have a history of rights abuse or am I missing something? I'm not terrified, just watchful, about the government response. Maybe I've spent too much time in and around the military, where one willingly gives up lots of rights for something of a higher purpose. I personally think the slippery slope argument is over-used by individuals of every political persuasion to object to nearly any change of any kind.

Unfortunately, we've got to go with the government we've got, not the one we'd like. I think politicians on both sides have stepped up and done pretty well while a few seem to be floundering. A crisis tends to expose the best and worst of officials. I believe this will get sorted out on election day.
Research China for contract tracing abuse. Look at Washington statues for slippery slope. Now back to Covid.
 
Looks like you are confusing peer review with "levels of evidence". Virtually all material in professional journals is peer-reviewed, like the restaurant study. Level of evidence classifies the quality and amount of evidence. This pyramid typically is used to visualize the concept:
Level_of_evidence_pyramid.jpg


The higher on the pyramid, the better the evidence. It narrows because there is less evidence available at the top. Something like the restaurant study is likely the best evidence that can be gotten about direct infection behavior a randomized controlled trial that deliberately infected some individuals would not make sense or be ethical. When at war, waiting for perfect intelligence before doing anything is a recipe for defeat. Best evidence available at any given time needs to be used at the individual and government levels in my opinion. This is a moving target in the current situation, much like intelligence in wartime.

Contract tracing has been done for centuries and doesn't seem to have a history of rights abuse or am I missing something? I'm not terrified, just watchful, about the government response. Maybe I've spent too much time in and around the military, where one willingly gives up lots of rights for something of a higher purpose. I personally think the slippery slope argument is over-used by individuals of every political persuasion to object to nearly any change of any kind.

Unfortunately, we've got to go with the government we've got, not the one we'd like. I think politicians on both sides have stepped up and done pretty well while a few seem to be floundering. A crisis tends to expose the best and worst of officials. I believe this will get sorted out on election day.

I just want the heavy hand of government to use data from a little higher on the pyramid. SCOTUS might call it strict scrutiny.

“Contract tracing has been done for centuries and doesn't seem to have a history of rights abuse or am I missing something? I'm not terrified, just watchful, about the government response. Maybe I've spent too much time in and around the military, where one willingly gives up lots of rights for something of a higher purpose. I personally think the slippery slope argument is over-used by individuals of every political persuasion to object to nearly any change of any kind.”

Not the kind of tracing technology has wrought. The detail of tracing is way too much for me. If this had been announced last year privacy experts would have been crying out and it would have been deemed invasive. Now the people, conditioned by media, are compliant little puppies...
 
The most astonishing part of all this was, and is, how fast people are ready to surrender their rights.
Why is that astonishing? They are temporarily being inconvenienced in order to stop a pandemic. So they are not concerned about protecting rights, more on protecting people.

But you don't believe that there is a dangerous pandemic so its not a surprise that you don't get it. And there are many more that share your view. So the US will have the longest run of COVID of any developed nation. Its the price of protecting your right to not participate in limiting the spread of a pandemic. But don't blame bad governments or lefties or liberals for your prolonged COVID experience in the US or try to convince yourselves it is not real. Its the choice you are making.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
112,946
Messages
1,422,778
Members
60,929
Latest member
Henchman
Back
Top