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

Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 34 posts

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#21

Post by blmsjw »

inyourtenement wrote: post #16
blmsjw wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arbitrary stat but ok. Deaths are kinda the most important otherwise we wouldn't be shutdown

Arbitrary!? This is nonsense. Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?

"Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?"

YES, THIS IS THE PRECEDENT FOR LITERALLY EVERY OTHER FUCKING ILLNESS KNOWN TO MAN. Why didn't people care about AIDS this much?

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#22

Post by legerdemain »

dragonwriter wrote: post #11
legerdemain wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article says the analysis controlled for age. Survival has improved in every age range.

> The article says the analysis controlled for age Even if age was the only risk factor (in which case controlling for age would negate the first and third points), the second point would cover that. But age isn't the only risk factor, so all three points are still relevant.

I don't think your second point is up for argument. We're not trying to disambiguate whether doctors are getting better at treating COVID or COVID is itself getting easier for doctors to treat.

Age is a strong predictor of COVID fatality, either directly or through correlates. In every US county whose stats I've spot-checked, deaths go up with age. It's also one of the best predictors, given that advanced age is much more common in populations than stronger, but more selective factors.

Thus, controlling for age and nevertheless observing a reduction in mortality should be taken as an indicator that COVID is becoming comparatively more medically tractable.

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#23

Post by m0zg »

inyourtenement wrote: post #16
blmsjw wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arbitrary stat but ok. Deaths are kinda the most important otherwise we wouldn't be shutdown

Arbitrary!? This is nonsense. Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?

Wrong hill to die on, bud. 60M people got infected with Swine Flu, and nobody even thought of shutting anything down. Why? Because it was about as deadly as regular flu. So yes, deaths are the right metric to track.

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#24

Post by dragonwriter »

blmsjw wrote: post #21
inyourtenement wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arbitrary!? This is nonsense. Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?

"Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?" YES, THIS IS THE PRECEDENT FOR LITERALLY EVERY OTHER FUCKING ILLNESS KNOWN TO MAN. Why didn't people care about AIDS this much?

> Why didn't people care about AIDS this much?

Because it disproportionately affected (and was popularly portrayed as doing so even more than it actually did, reinforcing this) homosexuals and intravenous drug users, populations a large portion of the rest of the country actively wanted to die.

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#25

Post by inyourtenement »

blmsjw wrote: post #21
inyourtenement wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arbitrary!? This is nonsense. Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?

"Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?" YES, THIS IS THE PRECEDENT FOR LITERALLY EVERY OTHER FUCKING ILLNESS KNOWN TO MAN. Why didn't people care about AIDS this much?

Because it was not transmitted by breathing. jfc.

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#26

Post by inyourtenement »

blmsjw wrote: post #21
inyourtenement wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arbitrary!? This is nonsense. Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?

"Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?" YES, THIS IS THE PRECEDENT FOR LITERALLY EVERY OTHER FUCKING ILLNESS KNOWN TO MAN. Why didn't people care about AIDS this much?

What is it that you think is actually going on? What conspiracy?

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#27

Post by inyourtenement »

blmsjw wrote: post #20
inyourtenement wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arbitrary!? This is nonsense. Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?

Yes Arbitrary. Why 100k? Why not 10, 100, 1000, 10,000, 1,000,000? Oh because 100k makes the stats look the best for your argument.

It's per 100k people in the state. It makes no difference if it's 100 or 100k. The comparison was state-to-state. The absolute numbers don't matter.

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#28

Post by inyourtenement »

m0zg wrote: post #23
inyourtenement wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arbitrary!? This is nonsense. Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?

Wrong hill to die on, bud. 60M people got infected with Swine Flu, and nobody even thought of shutting anything down. Why? Because it was about as deadly as regular flu. So yes, deaths are the right metric to track.

Completely irrelevant. There were an estimated 274k hospitalizations from swine flu, over the course of that year. So swine flu did not have the characteristics I specified.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-h1n1-pandemi...

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#29

Post by blmsjw »

inyourtenement wrote: post #27
blmsjw wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes Arbitrary. Why 100k? Why not 10, 100, 1000, 10,000, 1,000,000? Oh because 100k makes the stats look the best for your argument.

It's per 100k people in the state. It makes no difference if it's 100 or 100k. The comparison was state-to-state. The absolute numbers don't matter.

"total cases per 100k" you need 100k because otherwise you numbers would be insignificant. You'd be saying 0.003 people per 1000 which shows how asinine this shutdown really is. It's only when you deal with populations larger than a small city can you see statistical difference and there are too many additional error factors such as quantity/quality of tests at play that far exceed what ever trend you were trying to draw.

Re: Studies Point to Big Drop in Covid-19 Death Rates

#30

Post by blmsjw »

dragonwriter wrote: post #24
blmsjw wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Are you suggesting that if this illness had all the same characteristics -- long hospital stays, long-lasting damage to the body, highly transmissible -- but didn't kill, then we would not be "shutdown"?" YES, THIS IS THE PRECEDENT FOR LITERALLY EVERY OTHER FUCKING ILLNESS KNOWN TO MAN. Why didn't people care about AIDS this much?

> Why didn't people care about AIDS this much? Because it disproportionately affected (and was popularly portrayed as doing so even more than it actually did, reinforcing this) homosexuals and intravenous drug users, populations a large portion of the rest of the country actively wanted to die.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN