Coronavirus COVID-19

[BDKJMU]

Because of some of the recent discussion I a couple of models. Unfortunately the page I use for vaccine rates went dormant. It still only has vaccine rates through 8/31/2022. But i used the vaccine rates as of then as an indicator of tendency to follow public health recommendations.

Here is the end of the story: There is no support for the idea that States with more rural area are worse off because of that. That's because one of the factors I looked it is population density. And to the extent that there is an effect of population density, greater population density is associated with a higher death rate. The single most important factor isn't something like percent population 65 or older. It's poverty. And the second most important factor is boosted rate as of 8/31/2022 (which I am viewing as an indicator of the extent to which people in a State follow public health recommendations).

I looked at factors that might influence State by State COVID-19 death rates. BTW let me digress here by saying that, when you do the associations and see how things work out as expected, you can see how ridiculous it is to think that the death rates data are way off. They clearly are not.

OK. So anyway, a big part of my job is analyzing data on the impact of various factors on environmental pollution indicator levels. I just used the approach I use for that. I looked at the impact of various factors on State by State death rates as of 7 pm CST today. Here is a correlation matrix:



You can already see the end of the story. The yellow highlighted coefficients are significant at 95% confidence. You can see that the coefficients with the two highest absolute values for association with Death Rate are Poverty Rate and Boosted Rate. The positive correlation with Poverty Rate says Death Rate tends to be higher when Poverty Rate is higher. The negative correlation with Boosted Rate says Death Rate tends to be higher when Boosted Rate is lower.

I did some multiple regression models. First I did one leaving Boosted Rate out. I used the same process I use to eliminate variable in my job. And, in the end, the only variable remaining are Population Density and Poverty Rate. Both associations are positive. Higher Population Density tends to mean higher Death Rate. Again: That contradicts the rural is worse thing. Higher Poverty Rate also means higher Death rate.

But when I left Boosted Rate out, the diagnostic site I used said that the assumption of equal variances of residuals is violated. And it said that one possible reason for that is that I left out an important variable.

Enter adding Boosted Rate to the start of the process. After doing that, the final model included Percent 65 and older, Population Density, Poverty Rate, and Boosted Rate. Poverty appears to be the most important factor and Boosted Rate appears to be the second most. And the diagnostic site said, after I added Boosted Rate to the Model after it suggested that an important variable is missing, that the assumption of equal variances of residuals is good to go.

I swear, people who express some of the views I see on this site just have no clue. It is obvious that following public health recommendations is the smart thing to do. It is also obvious that the deaths data are reliable. I mean really, really obvious.

[kalm]

That’s it! No more vaxxes for me!

[SeattleGriz]

Nope.
https://nypost.com/2023/01/14/dr-leana- ... ercounted/

Because the New York Post reported that Dr. Lena Wen wrote that? There is a documented process by which COVID-19 deaths are counted. In order for something to be counted as a COVID-19 death, there has to be a professional opinion that COVID-19 was a factor leading to the person dying when they otherwise would not have died at that time. It's the same paradigm used for reporting deaths for diseases like influenza for decades. Here it is:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf

They are not just going to say "They died and they tested positive for COVID-19, therefore they are a COVID-19 death."

Thinking that is happening...that it's just a matter of dying WITH COVID...is ridiculous.

Once again. You show your lack of knowledge of the medical industry. First, the way COVID is diagnosed is nothing like influenza. Influenza required confirmatory testing, which was not performed for COVID AND symptoms. They allowed separation of the two for the first time in history with COVID.

And if you don't think COVID positives didn't drive diagnoses, you once again have shown you have never been near the medical industry.

[kalm]

Because the New York Post reported that Dr. Lena Wen wrote that? There is a documented process by which COVID-19 deaths are counted. In order for something to be counted as a COVID-19 death, there has to be a professional opinion that COVID-19 was a factor leading to the person dying when they otherwise would not have died at that time. It's the same paradigm used for reporting deaths for diseases like influenza for decades. Here it is:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf

They are not just going to say "They died and they tested positive for COVID-19, therefore they are a COVID-19 death."

Thinking that is happening...that it's just a matter of dying WITH COVID...is ridiculous.

Once again. You show your lack of knowledge of the medical industry. First, the way COVID is diagnosed is nothing like influenza. Influenza required confirmatory testing, which was not performed for COVID AND symptoms. They allowed separation of the two for the first time in history with COVID.

And if you don't think COVID positives didn't drive diagnoses, you once again have shown you have never been near the medical industry.

Do you have a link for Covid confirmatory testing not being used?

[SeattleGriz]

Once again. You show your lack of knowledge of the medical industry. First, the way COVID is diagnosed is nothing like influenza. Influenza required confirmatory testing, which was not performed for COVID AND symptoms. They allowed separation of the two for the first time in history with COVID.

And if you don't think COVID positives didn't drive diagnoses, you once again have shown you have never been near the medical industry.

Do you have a link for Covid confirmatory testing not being used?

The confirmatory test for PCR is a viral culture. They were not required. It was why it was important for the PCR to be run only around 25 cycles. If you can't run the confirmatory, don't generate false positives with the test by running it 40 cycles.

[houndawg]

Remember when, early in the pandemic, conservatives were comparing COVID-19 death rates in New York and Florida as a means of claiming DeSantis was doing things right? Early on, New York had a much higher death rate.

As of July 1, 2020, New York's death rate was nearly 10 times Florida's. 1668 deaths per million population vs. Florida's 176 (9.5 times as high).

As of January 1, 2021, New York's death rate was nearly twice Florida's. 1978 deaths per million population vs. Florida's 1084 (1.8 times as high).

I don't know how long ago Florida's death rate overtook New York's. But, when I checked this morning , I saw that it has. As of now, the Worldometers page shows a 3911 per million population death rate for New York vs. a 3,919 death rate for Florida.

I can remember that the first time I checked on where Florida ranked in terms of death rate it was middle of the pack. Somewhere in the 20s. Unfortunately I did not keep data from that far back so the earliest ranking I could find on my computer is from January 27, 2022. About a year ago. On that date, Worldometers indicated Florida had the 18th highest death rate. As of this morning, the site indicates it as having the 13th highest death rates. The State has continued to move up the rankings over time.

New York got hit hard early. For some period the fact (yes, fact) that community masking reduces the risk was not recognized. It was a new disease so health care professionals had not yet identified some approaches for reducing mortality. Pharmaceutical treatments were very limited. There were no vaccines.

Florida was spared early on.

As time went on, options for reducing risk were recognized, health care providers learned to better manage the disease, vaccines and more effective pharmaceutical treatments became available. New York officials followed the consensus advice of public health professionals. Florida officials, led by DeSantis, did not follow the consensus advice of public health professionals. And they brought in public health professionals with views contrary to the public health consensus to argue for their contrarian posture.

And here we are. Florida has more than made up the ground. Slightly more at this point. But more. From a time when New York had about 10 times Florida's death rate and "conservatives" were touting Florida's approach as superior to a time when the Sunshine State's death rate is now higher.

Most of those deaths counted as ‘Covid deaths’ are people duing WITH Covid, NOT FROM Covid.

People who would have survived if they hadn't had covid aggravating their condition.

BDFBL

[UNI88]

Most of those deaths counted as ‘Covid deaths’ are people duing WITH Covid, NOT FROM Covid.

People who would have survived if they hadn't had covid aggravating their condition.

BDFBL

They also would have survived if they exercised, ate better, took their medications, etc.

[houndawg]

People who would have survived if they hadn't had covid aggravating their condition.

BDFBL

They also would have survived if they exercised, ate better, took their medications, etc.

yeah and they still would have died anyway

[UNI88]

They also would have survived if they exercised, ate better, took their medications, etc.

yeah and they still would have died anyway

Your bouts of incoherency are getting worse.

[kalm]

yeah and they still would have died anyway

Your bouts of incoherency are getting worse.

Or elderly, or immune deficiencies. EG: a friend’s 64 year old father who ate healthy, didn’t smoke, didn’t drink, wasn’t obese died of it.

Health is a factor but it’s not always due to poor lifestyle choices.

[UNI88]

Your bouts of incoherency are getting worse.

Or elderly, or immune deficiencies. EG: a friend’s 64 year old father who ate healthy, didn’t smoke, didn’t drink, wasn’t obese died of it.

Health is a factor but it’s not always due to poor lifestyle choices.

Is that what Houndy was trying to say with his incoherent blabbering?

There were and continue to be a lot of factors. I don't think the Fauci, the CDC, etc. got it right and I don't think the "it's just the flu" people got it right either but it does look like the opinions of the "it's just the flu" people weren't as extreme as the governmentalists wanted people to believe.

[houndawg]

Or elderly, or immune deficiencies. EG: a friend’s 64 year old father who ate healthy, didn’t smoke, didn’t drink, wasn’t obese died of it.

Health is a factor but it’s not always due to poor lifestyle choices.

Is that what Houndy was trying to say with his incoherent blabbering?

There were and continue to be a lot of factors. I don't think the Fauci, the CDC, etc. got it right and I don't think the "it's just the flu" people got it right either but it does look like the opinions of the "it's just the flu" people weren't as extreme as the governmentalists wanted people to believe.

Does somebody need their blanky and a nap?

[UNI88]

Is that what Houndy was trying to say with his incoherent blabbering?

There were and continue to be a lot of factors. I don't think the Fauci, the CDC, etc. got it right and I don't think the "it's just the flu" people got it right either but it does look like the opinions of the "it's just the flu" people weren't as extreme as the governmentalists wanted people to believe.

Does somebody need their blanky and a nap?

I don't know. What does your caregiver think?

[SeattleGriz]

Or elderly, or immune deficiencies. EG: a friend’s 64 year old father who ate healthy, didn’t smoke, didn’t drink, wasn’t obese died of it.

Health is a factor but it’s not always due to poor lifestyle choices.

Is that what Houndy was trying to say with his incoherent blabbering?

There were and continue to be a lot of factors. I don't think the Fauci, the CDC, etc. got it right and I don't think the "it's just the flu" people got it right either but it does look like the opinions of the "it's just the flu" people weren't as extreme as the governmentalists wanted people to believe.

The Great Barrington declaration. They were all about targeted protection for those most vulnerable. This was the common sense approach over the last 100 years, but as we now see, this advice was ridiculed and suppressed for the zero COVID mentality.

[houndawg]

Does somebody need their blanky and a nap?

I don't know. What does your caregiver think?

She thinks you show all the signs of needing your blanky and a nap.

[kalm]

Is that what Houndy was trying to say with his incoherent blabbering?

There were and continue to be a lot of factors. I don't think the Fauci, the CDC, etc. got it right and I don't think the "it's just the flu" people got it right either but it does look like the opinions of the "it's just the flu" people weren't as extreme as the governmentalists wanted people to believe.

The Great Barrington declaration. They were all about targeted protection for those most vulnerable. This was the common sense approach over the last 100 years, but as we now see, this advice was ridiculed and suppressed for the zero COVID mentality.

Thanks, Marge.

[SeattleGriz]

The Great Barrington declaration. They were all about targeted protection for those most vulnerable. This was the common sense approach over the last 100 years, but as we now see, this advice was ridiculed and suppressed for the zero COVID mentality.

Thanks, Marge.

You bet! Now we just need to figure out why we have been having excess deaths. Did all the zero COVID madness really cause such a stumbling block in people's health?

Like I said from the beginning. Those wanting to change a 100 years of pandemic experience were crazy.

[SeattleGriz]

Because of some of the recent discussion I a couple of models. Unfortunately the page I use for vaccine rates went dormant. It still only has vaccine rates through 8/31/2022. But i used the vaccine rates as of then as an indicator of tendency to follow public health recommendations.

Here is the end of the story: There is no support for the idea that States with more rural area are worse off because of that. That's because one of the factors I looked it is population density. And to the extent that there is an effect of population density, greater population density is associated with a higher death rate. The single most important factor isn't something like percent population 65 or older. It's poverty. And the second most important factor is boosted rate as of 8/31/2022 (which I am viewing as an indicator of the extent to which people in a State follow public health recommendations).

I looked at factors that might influence State by State COVID-19 death rates. BTW let me digress here by saying that, when you do the associations and see how things work out as expected, you can see how ridiculous it is to think that the death rates data are way off. They clearly are not.

OK. So anyway, a big part of my job is analyzing data on the impact of various factors on environmental pollution indicator levels. I just used the approach I use for that. I looked at the impact of various factors on State by State death rates as of 7 pm CST today. Here is a correlation matrix:



You can already see the end of the story. The yellow highlighted coefficients are significant at 95% confidence. You can see that the coefficients with the two highest absolute values for association with Death Rate are Poverty Rate and Boosted Rate. The positive correlation with Poverty Rate says Death Rate tends to be higher when Poverty Rate is higher. The negative correlation with Boosted Rate says Death Rate tends to be higher when Boosted Rate is lower.

I did some multiple regression models. First I did one leaving Boosted Rate out. I used the same process I use to eliminate variable in my job. And, in the end, the only variable remaining are Population Density and Poverty Rate. Both associations are positive. Higher Population Density tends to mean higher Death Rate. Again: That contradicts the rural is worse thing. Higher Poverty Rate also means higher Death rate.

But when I left Boosted Rate out, the diagnostic site I used said that the assumption of equal variances of residuals is violated. And it said that one possible reason for that is that I left out an important variable.

Enter adding Boosted Rate to the start of the process. After doing that, the final model included Percent 65 and older, Population Density, Poverty Rate, and Boosted Rate. Poverty appears to be the most important factor and Boosted Rate appears to be the second most. And the diagnostic site said, after I added Boosted Rate to the Model after it suggested that an important variable is missing, that the assumption of equal variances of residuals is good to go.

I swear, people who express some of the views I see on this site just have no clue. It is obvious that following public health recommendations is the smart thing to do. It is also obvious that the deaths data are reliable. I mean really, really obvious.

Oh really? Wonder what the cancellation of doctors appointments has done to this disparity since the start of the pandemic.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/datab ... #section_1

In rural areas, age-adjusted death rates declined by 1.0% annually from 1999 (923.8 per 100,000) through 2010 (837.6), and then stabilized through 2019 (834.0) (Figure 1).
Rates in urban areas declined from 1999 (865.1) through 2019 (693.4), by 1.7% annually from 2000 through 2011, and by 0.3% annually from 2011 through 2019.
In 1999, the age-adjusted death rate in rural areas was 7% higher than in urban areas; by 2019, the rate in rural areas was 20% higher than in urban areas.

[JohnStOnge]

Because of some of the recent discussion I a couple of models. Unfortunately the page I use for vaccine rates went dormant. It still only has vaccine rates through 8/31/2022. But i used the vaccine rates as of then as an indicator of tendency to follow public health recommendations.

Here is the end of the story: There is no support for the idea that States with more rural area are worse off because of that. That's because one of the factors I looked it is population density. And to the extent that there is an effect of population density, greater population density is associated with a higher death rate. The single most important factor isn't something like percent population 65 or older. It's poverty. And the second most important factor is boosted rate as of 8/31/2022 (which I am viewing as an indicator of the extent to which people in a State follow public health recommendations).

I looked at factors that might influence State by State COVID-19 death rates. BTW let me digress here by saying that, when you do the associations and see how things work out as expected, you can see how ridiculous it is to think that the death rates data are way off. They clearly are not.

OK. So anyway, a big part of my job is analyzing data on the impact of various factors on environmental pollution indicator levels. I just used the approach I use for that. I looked at the impact of various factors on State by State death rates as of 7 pm CST today. Here is a correlation matrix:



You can already see the end of the story. The yellow highlighted coefficients are significant at 95% confidence. You can see that the coefficients with the two highest absolute values for association with Death Rate are Poverty Rate and Boosted Rate. The positive correlation with Poverty Rate says Death Rate tends to be higher when Poverty Rate is higher. The negative correlation with Boosted Rate says Death Rate tends to be higher when Boosted Rate is lower.

I did some multiple regression models. First I did one leaving Boosted Rate out. I used the same process I use to eliminate variable in my job. And, in the end, the only variable remaining are Population Density and Poverty Rate. Both associations are positive. Higher Population Density tends to mean higher Death Rate. Again: That contradicts the rural is worse thing. Higher Poverty Rate also means higher Death rate.

But when I left Boosted Rate out, the diagnostic site I used said that the assumption of equal variances of residuals is violated. And it said that one possible reason for that is that I left out an important variable.

Enter adding Boosted Rate to the start of the process. After doing that, the final model included Percent 65 and older, Population Density, Poverty Rate, and Boosted Rate. Poverty appears to be the most important factor and Boosted Rate appears to be the second most. And the diagnostic site said, after I added Boosted Rate to the Model after it suggested that an important variable is missing, that the assumption of equal variances of residuals is good to go.

I swear, people who express some of the views I see on this site just have no clue. It is obvious that following public health recommendations is the smart thing to do. It is also obvious that the deaths data are reliable. I mean really, really obvious.

Ok. I'll summarize it for you. The results are consistent with the following conclusions:

1) COVID-19 deaths data are meaningful. The data are not consistent with the "they died with COVID and not of COVID" belief.
2) Vaccines in particular and following public health recommendations in general have been highly effective in reducing the risk of COVID-19 deaths.
3) The most important factor in State to State variation in COVID-19 deaths is poverty.
4) There is no association such that rural areas have fared worse. The data suggest that the opposite is the case.
5) Percent population >65 is only seen as a factor if vaccination rate is controlled for.

[JohnStOnge]

Some notes on COVID-19 deaths data:

COVID-19 deaths are defined in a manner consistent with the way CDC has counted influenza deaths for many years. Here, from https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/faq.htm, is how CDC defines influenza deaths:

Seasonal flu-related deaths are deaths that occur in people for whom flu was likely a contributor to the cause of death, but not necessarily the primary cause of death.

Here, from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/faq.htm, is how CDC defines COVID-19 deaths:

Deaths are attributed to COVID-19 when Coronavirus Disease 2019, COVID-19, or other similar term(s) are reported as a cause or contributing cause of death on the death certificate.

You can get an idea as to what a contributing cause is by looking at the death certificate completion instructions at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/blue_form.pdf. You can see instructions specific to classifying COVID-19 deaths at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf.

It is not a situation in which everybody who dies with COVID-19 is classified as a COVID-19 death. In order for a death to be so classified, a professional completing a death certificate has to conclude that COVID-19 was, at least, a contributing cause. They are not, in the end, going to classify someone as being a COVID-19 death because they had tested positive for COVID-19 then their house got hit by a tornado.

I suppose one could say they should not include the contributing cause thing. But nobody complained about it when they were doing that with influenza deaths for many years. In fact, early on, people where trying to downplay the significance of COVID-19 by comparing the number of COVID-19 deaths to influenza deaths. Bottom line is that, based on classifying deaths in the same way as we've long classified influenza deaths, we were, over the past week, at a COVID-19 death rate of 91,823. When we consider that the highest point estimate for seasonal influenza deaths, counted the same way, over the past 11 influenza seasons (2010-2011 through 2021-2022) is 52,000 (2017-2018), it becomes obvious that we are, in relative terms, still in a very serious situation with COVID-19.

I just don't understand the psychology behind people insisting on being in denial about the significance of this disease. And I am distressed by the fact that the denial of reality comes mostly from the conservative side. The conservative side has become the "denial of reality" side on my fronts and, as someone who is philosophically conservative, it's hard for me to watch the degradation.

[JohnStOnge]

Just breaking it up a little into two posts to make one more point. The daily deaths we see in most places are not death certificates data. However, all indications are that they are pretty close to what the deaths certificate data say at any particular time and will say as more data come in.

As of now, according to provisional death certificate data at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covi ... /index.htm, there have been 1,098,594 COVID-19 deaths in the United States. According to Worldometers, there have been 1,132,236 COVID-19 deaths in the United States. So the deaths certificates data, at this point, show only 2.8% fewer deaths than the real time reporting data used by Worldomaters do. And at least part of that difference can be attributed to, as noted at the inked provisional deaths site, this situation:

Data during recent periods are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. This delay can range from 1 week to 8 weeks or more, depending on the jurisdiction and cause of death.

[JohnStOnge]

The other day I heard about DeSantis making an appearance with several people. One of them has apparently become popular in anti fax circles. It's Dr. Joseph Fraiman, an emergency medicine physician in Louisiana. There is some discussion of his work, among other things, at https://www.factcheck.org/2022/12/scich ... ne-claims/. The conclusion of the paper is that there was an alarming increase in serious adverse events of special interest in vaccine recipients compared with the placebo groups during the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials. It did eventually get published. But it was heavily criticized by experts in the field (https://pubpeer.com/publications/67E0F2 ... 5DC412A4A8).

Fraiman said what DeSantis wants to hear so DeSantis trots him around as someone "confirming" the anti vax fears.

To me, in a sane world, nobody would take the conclusion of an emergency physician over the conclusion of the FDA when it comes to clinical trials. The FDA has been monitoring clinical trials for decades. It has batteries of all of the necessary experts including mathematical statisticians who assess this sort of thing all the time. While the nature of probability is such that some things will initially slip through (like the problem with Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia and the Johnson & Johnson vaccine), the agency has an excellent historical record in that regard. And it has follow up that, for instance, caught the very rare Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia problem with the Johnson % Johnson vaccine.

But we have this situation now where, unfortunately, many conservatives will start off with false beliefs then shop around until they find some scrap of what they think is support for each false belief that they can grasp. So we have to deal with crap like what DeSantis does.

[UNI88]

Whose turn is it to read JSO’s diatribes and provide cliff notes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

Whose turn is it to read JSO’s diatribes and provide cliff notes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seattle’s job.

[SeattleGriz]

Whose turn is it to read JSO’s diatribes and provide cliff notes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seattle’s job.

My arms are tired from punching down, but I've already got the case definition of both Flu and COVID bookmarked. I'll post the "proof" later, but needless to say, StOnge is incorrect in that the two are diagnosed the same. Not to mention the laboratory test for COVID was not designed for that purpose, in addition to higher rural death rates, shows StOnge is pedaling garbage.

I believe his analysis is fine, it's just his data sets are garbage, so his results end up being garbage.