Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 649 posts

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#291

Post by __s »

pavlov wrote: post #275
not_a_moth wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

? You're comparing a prison to a nursing home Another data point, ~12k healthy foreign workers in Singapore have tested positive. The city-state has only 12 deaths total (all elderly, not the foreign workers). In Singapore the foreign workers may have already been asymptomatic for weeks. Based on NYC data, LA city data, Stanford's Santa Clara data, Singapore, Danish blood donor data, a picture is emerging that the vi…

Prisoners in America are not in great health. Many untreated conditions, often inadequate health care since birth.

Also they're malnourished to the point that you can reduce prison violence by giving vitamin supplements

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec...

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#292

Post by pastablister »

arcticbull wrote: post #273
ilamont wrote: post #109

96% are without symptoms yet . There was a nursing home in Massachusetts which had 51 out of 98 residents testing positive but asymptomatic in early April. While this sounded encouraging in the sense no one was critically ill because of coronavirus, a few weeks later 19 had died and about 30 more had tested positive. Let’s wait a month until there is a clearer picture about the impact of the virus on a particular pop…

The virus affects young and healthy folks without co-morbidities dramatically less than it does old folks at a nursing home. Based on New York City data, people without co-morbidities account for something like 6% of hospitalizations [1]. Old folks on a cruise ship full of old people, about 20% showed no symptoms. Is it a big stretch to think that scales to prisoners as shown? They're pretty young (only 2.8% of priso…

Perfect, sounds like a good experiment then, so let's wait and see.

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#293

Post by [deleted] »

pavlov wrote: post #275
not_a_moth wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

? You're comparing a prison to a nursing home Another data point, ~12k healthy foreign workers in Singapore have tested positive. The city-state has only 12 deaths total (all elderly, not the foreign workers). In Singapore the foreign workers may have already been asymptomatic for weeks. Based on NYC data, LA city data, Stanford's Santa Clara data, Singapore, Danish blood donor data, a picture is emerging that the vi…

Prisoners in America are not in great health. Many untreated conditions, often inadequate health care since birth.

[deleted]

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#294

Post by bumby »

marcosdumay wrote: post #287
bumby wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dr. David Katz was just in Bill Maher’s show indicating the test has a high false negative rate

The false negative rate isn't that relevant on this context, and has no obvious relation to the false positive rate. Besides, the article you pointed down in a reply is about a different kind of test.

I was under the impression the PCR test was a better test. Is that incorrect?

I do disagree that a false negative rate is not important in the context of a disease where asymptotic cases may still be contagious, however.

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#295

Post by pbhjpbhj »

marcell wrote: post #50
cies wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did similar calculations, and found the institutions in charge give us very unreliable data. The term "corona case" is very, very, ambiguous and cannot the understood as such without a detailed explanation on how the counting was done. Thanks for sharing. I found the peek in all-case mortality also very interesting, because that way counting is much more unambiguous: dead is dead. They showed a clear diversion from…

Yea, I agree that the case counts are very different between regions. I think the more interesting column is the IFR estimate based on the antibody study results, since dead is dead as you say. It is interesting though that the median undercount is converging to ~10-20x. Perhaps the protocols across regions are similar enough that the confirmed case counts are somewhat comparable.

It seems possible to me that there are variations, mutations, in different regions that might account for some of the variance in apparent R value and such?

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#296

Post by [deleted] »

pastablister wrote: post #292
arcticbull wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The virus affects young and healthy folks without co-morbidities dramatically less than it does old folks at a nursing home. Based on New York City data, people without co-morbidities account for something like 6% of hospitalizations [1]. Old folks on a cruise ship full of old people, about 20% showed no symptoms. Is it a big stretch to think that scales to prisoners as shown? They're pretty young (only 2.8% of priso…

Perfect, sounds like a good experiment then, so let's wait and see.

[deleted]

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#297

Post by edmundsauto »

alexbanks wrote: post #216
edmundsauto wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On 1), what do you consider "not that serious"? IE, what are your metrics of choice, and what are the acceptable values? Regarding the cost-benefit discussion, my perspective is that people only want to discuss the downsides from a reduced economy. Second order effects include reduced vehicle deaths, reduced deaths from pollution, etc. IE, my discussions has felt agenda driven because it considers first order effects…

It seems kind of ridiculous to cite "reduced deaths from pollution" as an upside while people are also being forced into confinement, no?

If the argument is that more people will die from economic recession, it's a necessary component. What's the rationale for excluding it? Without 2nd order effects, it doesn't seem like the correct comparison.

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#298

Post by edmundsauto »

sharken wrote: post #236
edmundsauto wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On 1), what do you consider "not that serious"? IE, what are your metrics of choice, and what are the acceptable values? Regarding the cost-benefit discussion, my perspective is that people only want to discuss the downsides from a reduced economy. Second order effects include reduced vehicle deaths, reduced deaths from pollution, etc. IE, my discussions has felt agenda driven because it considers first order effects…

We are quite a lot of people that fear the operation will be successful but the patient is dead with the Corona actions being taken. Case in point, 26.5 million americans have sought unemployment benefits ( https://vastuullisuusuutiset.fi/en/weben/women-bear-brunt-of... ). The deaths in New York are quite telling for who is at risk, see https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109867/coronavirus-deat... . Over 90% of the…

Your argument supports the statement that coronavirus is not as dangerous for young people compared to old people. And that it's really serious for old people.

There remains a required link to why this isn't serious for young people. And from there, an argument that this situation is better than the other scenarios (including 2nd order effects from other scenarios).

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#299

Post by pastablister »

ilamont wrote: post #109

96% are without symptoms yet . There was a nursing home in Massachusetts which had 51 out of 98 residents testing positive but asymptomatic in early April. While this sounded encouraging in the sense no one was critically ill because of coronavirus, a few weeks later 19 had died and about 30 more had tested positive. Let’s wait a month until there is a clearer picture about the impact of the virus on a particular pop…

Is this not just another Diamond Princess Cruise?

Re: In 4 US state prisons, 3,300 inmates test positive, 96% without symptoms

#300

Post by pbhjpbhj »

rubber_duck wrote: post #268
newacct583 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An IFR of even 1% is pretty bad To be clear: it would be the most dangerous general epidemic disease since the advent of vaccination, and by a significant amount. You need to go back to measles and polio to find general population outbreaks that were more lethal.

A very important thing is that % is concentrated among old and people with preexisting health conditions. Not every death is the same - a 80 year old with weak immune system could have lived 5 years longer without corona, but a healthy 20 year-old dying from cytokine storm caused by influenza has lost potentially 60 years of healthy life - the loss is much worse.

How does that compare, with other high IFR diseases, didn't they also have deaths skewed towards older people?
Post reply on HN