Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.

[moonsweeper]

The novel coronavirus' mortality profile is almost identical to the natural mortality profile. It kills people almost perfectly in proportion to their chances to die from natural causes.

Almost like it is exacerbating deaths from co-morbidities rather than being an actual 'super-killer' on its own.

imagine that...

[Mistwell]

The novel coronavirus' mortality profile is almost identical to the natural mortality profile. It kills people almost perfectly in proportion to their chances to die from natural causes.

Almost like it is exacerbating deaths from co-morbidities rather than being an actual 'super-killer' on its own.

imagine that...

It's massively reducing life expectancy. It's killing people much earlier than natural causes would normally kill them. From January 26, 2020, through October 3, 2020, an estimated 299,028 more persons than expected have died in the United States.

Co-morbitities doesn't mean you're expected to die soon. For example, I have high blood pressure, which is a co-morbitity. My life expectancy is still roughly another 25-30 years. If I die next week from Covid-19  you will claim I had co-morbitities so it was "aligned with natural causes" except I will have lost 25-30 years of my natural life expectancy with this co-morbidity.

I find it sad that on a ROLE PLAYING GAME forum that y'all think co-morbitities is something only old people at the end of their lives already might have. Hello, we're gamers. Many of us have co-morbitities of some kind. And by "us" I don't mean the population of this message board I mean the general population of RPG players as a whole. We tend to be overweight. We tend to have a higher incidence of high blood pressure, diabetes, and related conditions. This attitude that somehow it's OK if people die with those because "co-morbitites so it's natural" is obvious bullshit which I think none of you actually believe when it comes to the people you know in your lives. It's just more Internet fake badassery.

[Pat]

It's massively reducing life expectancy. It's killing people much earlier than natural causes would normally kill them. From January 26, 2020, through October 3, 2020, an estimated 299,028 more persons than expected have died in the United States.

No, it's slightly reducing life expectancy. And you flipped back to the number of deaths, rather than lost years of life in the last sentence. That doesn't bolster your argument, it makes a different one.

Stephen Elledge, a Harvard professor of genetics, looked at the death profile of the novel coronavirus back when roughly 200,000 people had died, and estimated the pandemic cost the US 2.5 million years of life. That's a loss of 12.5 years of life for each death, which is high compared to other estimates.

Scott Atlas, a Stanford physician, and some business professors from places like the University and Chicago and Duke did an analysis of the years of life lost due to the economic shutdowns. They came up an estimate of 1.5 million lost years of life from the roughly 2 months of lockdown that had taken place by late May, using very conservative estimations (the real number is bound to be much higher).

We could extrapolate the numbers directly (340K becomes 4.3 million years of life, 9 months becomes 6.4 million years), but that's not really a fair comparison because there might have been changes in the demographic profiles, and we'd need to look at the specific components of the lockdowns. It would be good to have more up to date numbers. But one thing should be very clear: This isn't about saving lives. It's about trading some lives for other lives. We need to be looking at the real costs and trade offs, and avoiding the simplistic "it's just a flu!" or only counting covid-19 deaths.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/10/20/covid-america-2-5-million-life-years-harvard-stephen-elledge/5994363002/
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/499394-the-covid-19-shutdown-will-cost-americans-millions-of-years-of-life

[Ratman_tf]

I find it sad that on a ROLE PLAYING GAME forum that y'all think co-morbitities is something only old people at the end of their lives already might have. Hello, we're gamers. Many of us have co-morbitities of some kind. And by "us" I don't mean the population of this message board I mean the general population of RPG players as a whole. We tend to be overweight. We tend to have a higher incidence of high blood pressure, diabetes, and related conditions. This attitude that somehow it's OK if people die with those because "co-morbitites so it's natural" is obvious bullshit which I think none of you actually believe when it comes to the people you know in your lives. It's just more Internet fake badassery.

And I find it odd that people are willing to toss aside science and reason in their fear of getting Covid. You can see it in the crazy people crossing the street to get within 6 feet of someone without a mask so they can yell at them about wearing masks. Or the continual shifting narrative about the efficacy of masks and even the reason to wear them in the first place. Anyone who brings up the hardships that lockdowns bring or question the impact of Covid compared to other maladies and causes of death are dismissed as kooks.
It all strikes me as similar to the Satanic Panic of the 80's. People are scared and desperate for a fix of some kind, and their critical thought goes out the window.

[Mistwell]

It's massively reducing life expectancy. It's killing people much earlier than natural causes would normally kill them. From January 26, 2020, through October 3, 2020, an estimated 299,028 more persons than expected have died in the United States.

No, it's slightly reducing life expectancy. And you flipped back to the number of deaths, rather than lost years of life in the last sentence. That doesn't bolster your argument, it makes a different one.

Stephen Elledge, a Harvard professor of genetics, looked at the death profile of the novel coronavirus back when roughly 200,000 people had died, and estimated the pandemic cost the US 2.5 million years of life. That's a loss of 12.5 years of life for each death, which is high compared to other estimates.

Scott Atlas, a Stanford physician, and some business professors from places like the University and Chicago and Duke did an analysis of the years of life lost due to the economic shutdowns. They came up an estimate of 1.5 million lost years of life from the roughly 2 months of lockdown that had taken place by late May, using very conservative estimations (the real number is bound to be much higher).

We could extrapolate the numbers directly (340K becomes 4.3 million years of life, 9 months becomes 6.4 million years), but that's not really a fair comparison because there might have been changes in the demographic profiles, and we'd need to look at the specific components of the lockdowns. It would be good to have more up to date numbers. But one thing should be very clear: This isn't about saving lives. It's about trading some lives for other lives. We need to be looking at the real costs and trade offs, and avoiding the simplistic "it's just a flu!" or only counting covid-19 deaths.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/10/20/covid-america-2-5-million-life-years-harvard-stephen-elledge/5994363002/
https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/499394-the-covid-19-shutdown-will-cost-americans-millions-of-years-of-life

While I agree lockdowns also cost lives, that isn't the claim I was disputing. Covid-19 is not "kill[ing] people almost perfectly in proportion to their chances to die from natural causes." It is in fact reducing life expectancy by a meaningful amount, no matter how you choose to spin the data.

[rawma]

I'm not the only one, that's a ridiculous claim. But you do like your appeals to non-existent general authorities.

Federal law on this exists and is a fairly specific authority. "Pat's opinion" is too weak an authority for anything but the corner bar.

Also, who cares about the GSA? You certainly don't. Your argument is that Biden was the president-elect on November 5. The GSA administrator didn't certify Biden until weeks later, so that doesn't support your position in the slightest.

My first statement of congratulations came on November 7th, after every media that traditionally calls presidential contests had called it for Biden. The thread in which you argued this was in December, well after the GSA determination. You could have made points earlier after my first post; but after the November 23rd recognition by the GSA, all tradition and law was against you on that matter.

That you accused a huge number of media, both neutral and across the political spectrum, left and right and center, of deliberately lying is the stuff of idiotic conspiracy theories. Which does mean you're posting in the right place, just not credibly.

For the rest, I will just repeat the evidence. Anyone interested in details can track the thread back.

Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?

Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.

The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.

[Pat]

I'm not the only one, that's a ridiculous claim. But you do like your appeals to non-existent general authorities.

Federal law on this exists and is a fairly specific authority. "Pat's opinion" is too weak an authority for anything but the corner bar.

Fortunately, I'm not relying on an opinion. I made an argument, which should be judged based on its merits, not your opinion on whether someone else has an opinion.

Also, who cares about the GSA? You certainly don't. Your argument is that Biden was the president-elect on November 5. The GSA administrator didn't certify Biden until weeks later, so that doesn't support your position in the slightest.

My first statement of congratulations came on November 7th, after every media that traditionally calls presidential contests had called it for Biden. The thread in which you argued this was in December, well after the GSA determination. You could have made points earlier after my first post; but after the November 23rd recognition by the GSA, all tradition and law was against you on that matter.

That you accused a huge number of media, both neutral and across the political spectrum, left and right and center, of deliberately lying is the stuff of idiotic conspiracy theories. Which does mean you're posting in the right place, just not credibly.

That's false on multiple levels. The sad part is, I don't think you even realize what you're doing.

I pointed out the media falsely called Biden the president-elect when he didn't meet the conditions, and then pointed out the error had gotten widespread coverage, so they had ample time to learn of their mistake and correct it. But they did not. That's not time dependent. It doesn't matter whether I posted it on November 5, 2020, today, or November 5, 3020. Historical facts remain historical facts. Nor is it dependent on whether enough states ultimately certified for Biden, who the electors chose, or any of the other possible standards for determining the president-elect, including the very weak one you favor (the GSA admin's blessing). They were were wrong to call him the president-elect instead of something like the presumptive president-elect from election night up through the date of whichever standard you prefer, and they will remain wrong for doing that until the end of time.

This was a great opportunity for the media to educate the public on how the electoral process works. They should have posted a mea culpa, and then used that as an opportunity to talk about the false assumptions they made, how those assumptions broke down in this election, the ambiguity of the term, the various ways it can be interpreted, and the various steps that are taken between election night and the inauguration. Highlighting the arcane details would edify the people on the strengths and weaknesses of the system, and could have been a unifying moment. Instead we got a divisive, hyper-politicized nightmare, and partisans like you who are so fixated on their candidate winning that they don't trust or even care about the process. Way to go, "objective" journalism.

It's rather telling how often blind faith in the media is combined with personal attacks instead of arguments.

For the rest, I will just repeat the evidence. Anyone interested in details can track the thread back.

Trumpbux Mark 2.0 adds up to $166 billion, and expanded unemployment another $120 billion. What part of the $634 billion left over adds up to helping those were more negatively affected? The money to monitor climate change in Tibet? Paying for investigating a race riot in 1908? Hundreds of millions to help another country (the Sudan) pay down it's own debt?

Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.

The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.

Thanks for supporting my argument.

[Pat]

While I agree lockdowns also cost lives, that isn't the claim I was disputing. Covid-19 is not "kill[ing] people almost perfectly in proportion to their chances to die from natural causes." It is in fact reducing life expectancy by a meaningful amount, no matter how you choose to spin the data.

You were talking about a couple different things, the overall death toll and the number of years of life lost. I was pointing out they're very different measures. My discussion of the lockdowns was to illustrate the number of years of life lost, not a specific rebuttal to anything you said.

But you're still incorrect about the mortality profile. The way it mimics the natural mortality profile is the key reason it's been called a "strange" pandemic. It's remarkable, compared to other diseases. For instance, the 1918 flu killed the relatively young.
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3259

Your claim that sars2 is reducing lifespans by a "meaningful amount" is correct, but your initial claim that the novel coronavirus was "massively reducing life expectancy" was not. The fatality rate is roughly equivalent to the Hong Kong flu, and lower than the 1918 flu. And the deaths are extremely heavily biased toward the higher age categories, where the expected number of years of life is lower. This is not like a war, or car crashes, or anything else that selectively or at least indiscriminately kills the young and healthy. I don't have a cite handy, but the estimates I've seen of the impact of covid-19 on overall life expectancies are a small fraction of a year. It's certainly meaningful, because it is killing large numbers of people. But it's still a small percentage of the population, and the population it kills tends to have much less life to lose, so the overall numbers don't budge all that much.

[EOTB]

British police arrest woman going to hospital, filming it as mostly empty (contradicting official information)

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/12/31/british-woman-arrested-after-filming-empty-hospital-wards-while-health-officials-push-covid-panic/#more-206651

[Shasarak]

I was mostly just messing around, piggybacking Shasarak's sarcasm

Hey get your own sarcasm!

I work hard for mine, dont be piggybacking off of it.

[Mistwell]

[VisionStorm]

Damn Vision.  I hope your brother gets well and fully recover from that if he can.

Thanks!

All the surgeries are hopefully done now, but after a year of not walking, I'm guessing its gonna be another year till he fully heals and goes through physical therapy to start walking on that leg again.

[Shasarak]

You didn't read what I posted. There are very real backups r/t the increased patient load as I mentioned. Mistwell is saying he's seen a situation where non-treatment areas are being converted to patient-care areas. That's not normal and is a sign of severe overload.

I also never claimed to be a Dr. (MD or otherwise), but I am professionally familiar with healthcare administration and patient care processes relevant to these issues.

If you had experience then some of your predictions would actually happen.

[VisionStorm]

Why I don't buy the covid death estimates: "Congressman-elect Luke Letlow suffered a heart attack following operation"

Link: https://nypost.com/2020/12/30/congressman-elect-luke-letlow-suffered-a-heart-attack-during-operation/

But I'm sure that most people who've died from the virus actually died from the virus.

[jhkim]

Why I don't buy the covid death estimates: "Congressman-elect Luke Letlow suffered a heart attack following operation"

Link: https://nypost.com/2020/12/30/congressman-elect-luke-letlow-suffered-a-heart-attack-during-operation/

But I'm sure that most people who've died from the virus actually died from the virus.

So according to the article, he underwent an operation for covid-19 and died as a result. In ordinary times, if someone dies from a risky operation to remove a cancer tumor, for example - then people will say they died from cancer. The surgery was required to save their life because of the cancer.

I'll buy that the numbers can vary some based on definitions. But for the whole thing to be a sham requires that almost every country in the world be cooperating in a massive conspiracy -- including countries directly opposed to each other.

In the U.S., there is no pattern of Democratic-controlled states and Republican-controlled states in terms of their covid-19 death rate. The top death rates include North Dakota, South Dakota, and Louisiana -- but also New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts.