• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Coronavirus !!! Very Political Thread !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Colonel Angus said:
Strauss works (or worked) for ABC News. Feel free to post the other MSM outlets reporting or tweeting out this info.

Or is a scholar such as yourself confused over the meaning of the term 'more attention'?
Click to expand...

Color me shocked that other news outlets haven't made a big deal about a guys tweet! How come there is no link to an article detailing the data and the analysis? What does "major increase" mean? Time series analyses are really hard to do correctly, I'd love to see the actual analysis. Perhaps other news outlets are reluctant to run away with a story based on a tweet with no details and no definitions.
 
birdman said:
Color me shocked that other news outlets haven't made a big deal about a guys tweet! How come there is no link to an article detailing the data and the analysis? What does "major increase" mean? Time series analyses are really hard to do correctly, I'd love to see the actual analysis. Perhaps other news outlets are reluctant to run away with a story based on a tweet with no details and no definitions.
Click to expand...

Any study that tried to use time series data from across states to compare how covid cases and diagnosis rates changed pre, during and post lock-down would have to control for severity of the state by state lock downs, how bad the pandemic was before the lock down in each state, and state by state testing intensity and post lock-down measures to retard viral spread (i.e., contact tracing, mandatory masks). Not all states had the same level of lock down, not all states had the same level of infection prior to lock downs, and not all states have the same level of surveillance and control now so looking for patterns by pooling state by state data will lead to erroneous inference and/or huge Standard Error estimates which dampen our ability to determine trends. Within individual states you could draw conclusions about the change in infection rates pre and post lock down, but unless properly analyzed we will have significant difficulty in drawing conclusions like the data from FL, KY, SC, MT, etc, show that lock downs didn't change anything because the term lock-down isn't uniformly defined. I'd also suggest that there probably hasn't been enough time since the lock down to see a change in viral detection rates yet. It's 14 days before symptoms appear plus more time for them to get severe enough to go see a doctor and get tested, seems to me you'd need to wait at least another week before we'd be able to detect any trends in the data, plus the day to day variability in the new case rate is really high for some reason so that washes out our ability to detect a trend, positive or negative. Time series are challenging to analyze and it might be a month before we will really have a sense of whether loosening the lock downs was a good idea.
 
Interesting how the reopen crowd will nitpick the modeling to death when it supports things like shutdowns and social distancing but if there’s a hint of a message that supports the “not a big deal” side, sure let’s rush it out there ASAP nuance and accuracy be damned.
 
Here's a good primer on Pneumonia deaths in TX, FL, GA

EZL9M84X0AUUO-1
 
GA is combining multiple data fields to lower its numbers. FL fired the woman in charge of these stats for trying to giving honest numbers.
 
birdman said:
Any study that tried to use time series data from across states to compare how covid cases and diagnosis rates changed pre, during and post lock-down would have to control for severity of the state by state lock downs, how bad the pandemic was before the lock down in each state, and state by state testing intensity and post lock-down measures to retard viral spread (i.e., contact tracing, mandatory masks). Not all states had the same level of lock down, not all states had the same level of infection prior to lock downs, and not all states have the same level of surveillance and control now so looking for patterns by pooling state by state data will lead to erroneous inference and/or huge Standard Error estimates which dampen our ability to determine trends. Within individual states you could draw conclusions about the change in infection rates pre and post lock down, but unless properly analyzed we will have significant difficulty in drawing conclusions like the data from FL, KY, SC, MT, etc, show that lock downs didn't change anything because the term lock-down isn't uniformly defined. I'd also suggest that there probably hasn't been enough time since the lock down to see a change in viral detection rates yet. It's 14 days before symptoms appear plus more time for them to get severe enough to go see a doctor and get tested, seems to me you'd need to wait at least another week before we'd be able to detect any trends in the data, plus the day to day variability in the new case rate is really high for some reason so that washes out our ability to detect a trend, positive or negative. Time series are challenging to analyze and it might be a month before we will really have a sense of whether loosening the lock downs was a good idea.
Click to expand...

Personally, i believe Hospitalization rates and Deaths are more important at this stage compared to gross # of new cases because we are testing more. Unsure about FL and GA, but SC is finally getting to a place where they can test people other than the very sick. Now, the idiots who think that this virus is overblown are never going to get tested, and were more than likely out and about anyway during the "stay-at-home" order. That group, along with those types of people who are tourists here from other states, are the ones that really need to be swabbed up.
 
RJKarl said:
GA is combining multiple data fields to lower its numbers. FL fired the woman in charge of these stats for trying to giving honest numbers.
Click to expand...

Those are recorded pneumonia deaths, not COVID.
 
Becasue GA has been proven to be manipulating numbers and FL fired its #3 person in statistics for telling the truth manipulating numbers.
 
RJKarl said:
Becasue GA has been proven to be manipulating numbers and FL fired its #3 person in statistics for telling the truth manipulating numbers.
Click to expand...

The states are not in charge of this data.
 
RJKarl said:
They send the data to the CDC.
Click to expand...

It would take widespread malpractice on the part of multiple hospitals and multiple coroners over multiple years. This is not data that three Governors are simultaneously and retroactively manipulating.

Those are the pneumonia deaths for this time period over the last 5 years. The reddit page that Slavitt originally sourced was bad research.

Moreover, it's a 33% increase in FL in Pneumonia deaths from 2019 to 2020, which suggests that there is no manipulation on the part of DeSantis in this particular set of data.
 
According to Rebecca Jones (I think that's her name), she was instructed to manipulate the data in FL to downplay everything. When she refused, she was fired.
 
RJKarl said:
According to Rebecca Jones (I think that's her name), she was instructed to manipulate the data in FL to downplay everything. When she refused, she was fired.
Click to expand...

That's the state of Florida coronavirus tracking site, not this. This is different data.
 
My first guess is that some of those hospitals without ICUs have GOP connections and were able to create a secondary market for remdesivir.
 
PhDeac said:
My first guess is that some of those hospitals without ICUs have GOP connections and were able to create a secondary market for remdesivir.
Click to expand...

yup, money filtering scheme

GOP knows how the bend the rules. They seem really stupid most of the time, but that is mainly Trump. The rest are cooking the books.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top