COVID-19 Megathread 5: The Trumps catch COVID-19

[emailking]

Del Tachi your statistics don't take into account that most people under 35 in Colorado haven't had the virus yet, and the deaths per million for people under 35 (which is what you're using to estimate a given individual's chances) will be a lot higher if everyone gets the virus.

[emailking]

That would only be the case if you expect the population distribution of new cases/deaths to wildly change the more infections there are.

The way you calculated it, it absolutely would. You took deaths/(total number of people) not deaths/(total number of cases). If there are more infections, there will obviously be more deaths, so the numerator increases and the denominator doesn't.

What evidence do you have that younger people haven't been getting the virus until now?

They have been getting the virus.

[emailking]

There's no reason to think that the age-distribution of all cases (i.e., not just those that are test-confirmed, and including asymptomatic ones) is any different now then it was 1 month, 3 months or even 5 months ago.

That's irrelevant.

Calculating mortality as a function of positive cases ignores the deterministic effects of testing.  Deaths and hospitalizations are not a function of testing, so reporting them per total population is the appropriate statistical measure.

You equated his chances of dying from the virus to be the number of under 35's who have died divided by the total number of under 35's. This is a very low number. But if all the under 35's get back out there, without a worry in the world, which is what you obviously want based on all your posts, then many (most?) of them will catch the virus. And then the number of under 35's who have died divided by the total number of under 35's will be a much larger number. You're equating that number with the chances of under 35's dying from the virus. I don't think that's a good way to express that, but it's your construction.

On the other hand, a very large fraction of under 35's already travel in cars on a regular basis so there is no such issue there.

All the people who liked your post don't understand statistics.

I don't care who likes my posts, but I have no idea how you could know whether or not they understand statistics.

[emailking]

Inherent in your post is the idea that COVID somehow gets deadlier the more people it infects.  There's no reason to think that the proportion of young people who die from COVID-19 will be greater, assuming the age-distribution of all cases (i.e., including non-tested, asymptomatic and sub-clinical) remains the same.

I don't think it gets deadlier. It doesn't. I'm saying the people who have not been infected, at all, do not factor into a calculation as to how deadly it is. But that's exactly what you did!

[emailking]

We don’t need to account for the uninfected in order to have an assessment of how deadly the virus is (it should be pretty obvious that the uninfected categorically can’t die of the virus, lol).  The fatality rate in a population shouldn’t change whether 1,000 or 100,000 are (truly) infected.  Adjusting mortality based on testing actually obscures this, but mortality per population does not.

Fine. What I'm trying to say is that mortality per population is not your chance of dying from covid. You said:

If you're in high school, you're much much likelier to die of the flu or a car accident than COVID-19.  Colorado has less than 1 death per million people under age 35,

So you're saying mortality from covid per population is your chance of dying from covid. Most of the population has been taking drastic steps to avoid covid (and you want them to stop that). Most of the population does not take drastic steps to avoid cars.

[emailking]

No it's not because it's strongly watered down by a large population. Consider after the very first death from covid-19, your estimate would predict the chance of drying from it is 1 out of 8 billion. There's been what like 10,000 or so under 35 cases in Colorado? Out of millions. Taking the number of deaths from that 10,000 and dividing by a million and calling that the chance of dying is ridiculous.

What it is is the chance that if you randomly select an under 35 who was alive at the start of the year, that s/he has now expired from covid. But it's nothing more than that.

[emailking]

You don't understand what I'm using the statistic to suggest

Ok, what are you using the statistic to suggest?

[emailking]

Yeah I'm not talking about your comparison between under 35 and >75. I'm talking about the comparison of death from covid vs. death from cars.

[emailking]

Cases seem to be leveling off some. Hopefully we're at or near peak.

[emailking]

If they have 14 players who have to self-isolate I'm not sure how they're going to have much of a team for the next 2 weeks. I mean it depends who's infected and they can probably still put up 9 capable players but they're probably going to suck.

[emailking]

78% of COVID-19 patients show signs of heart damage after recovery

The team tracked patients who had experienced a wide variety of outcomes after their diagnosis. Just two of the 100 patients had to undergo mechanical ventilation, for example, and oxygen supplementation was required in 28 patients.

All participants underwent cardiac MR imaging using “standardized and unified” protocols on 3T MRI scanners. The cohort was compared with 50 healthy control patients and 57 risk factor-matched patients.

Overall, the team found that 78 patients had abnormal imaging findings. Findings included raised myocardial native T1 (73 patients), raised myocardial native T2 (60 patients), myocardial late gadolinium enhancement (32 patients) and pericardial enhancement (22 patients). Three patients underwent a biopsy after severe abnormalities were detected; “active lymphocytic inflammation” was present in these patients, but “no evidence of any viral genome.”

https://www.cardiovascularbusiness.com/topics/cardiovascular-imaging/78-covid-19-patients-heart-damage-recovery

How much, if any, of this could just be due to bad diets or an unhealthy western lifestyle?

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1289397528639791104

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1289633359681839105

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/BenjAlvarez1/status/1289488793507045376

Trump retweeted this, and I don't know if it's to play to his narrative that Europe isn't doing better than us, or if he's praising this crowd.

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1290252674777133057
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1290257055534551043

[emailking]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1290282508303716352
^ attacked Deborah Birx.