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

Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

maximumtruth.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 151 posts

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#121

Post by OrvalWintermute »

pacerwpg wrote: post #91
HideousKojima wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if your premise that the labor shortages (and other economic issues) are caused by pandemic deaths is correct, mind you. The overwhelming majority of deaths (around 80%) from the pandemic in all countries was amongst retirement age individuals, most of whom are out of the workforce.

200,000 working age people in the US dying isn't nothing. It could also be explained by disabilities as a result of COVID and people unable to work as a result of that.

it could also be explained by All Cause Mortality being higher in vaccinated populations than unvaccinated (which, by the way, is the proper use of ACM when you compare two populations with a control).

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#122

Post by OrvalWintermute »

omginternets wrote: post #64
HideousKojima wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nor did we have the data to say it WAS necessary, but we sure as hell could predict most of the negative social and economic side effects easily. Causing profound developmental delays in an entire generation of children and lowering lifetime educational attainment for almost every single teenager was worth it though, I guess.

The principle of caution cuts both ways. During the pandemic, it seems to have only cut one way. It is possible to support lockdowns while still recognizing this.

Maybe lockdowns and protections where appropriate for the at risk populations?

The blanket lockdowns of individuals not at risk was the height of tyranny!

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#123

Post by [deleted] »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #103
TheFattestNinja wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imho it's well past the point of "almost shadowing the rest". It singlehandledly makes the rest of the work (at least in my judgement) completely garbage. Which is a shame because it seems good. I don't want to sound too "emotional" but come the fuck on. Even if you want to be "rational" and just look at hard monetary data you could just take the years lost, give them a price tag (average yearly salary * years accoun…

I think it somewhat strengthens the rest of the work. This is clearly not the answer the author wanted to find. And the bit about average number of days of life lost was a desperate attempt to hold on to his previous conclusion, before he looked at the numbers, that lockdowns were authoritarian overreactions. I don't think it's fundamentally wrong to measure healthcare effects with numerical measures like QALY, but i…

[deleted]

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#124

Post by mikkergp »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #103
TheFattestNinja wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imho it's well past the point of "almost shadowing the rest". It singlehandledly makes the rest of the work (at least in my judgement) completely garbage. Which is a shame because it seems good. I don't want to sound too "emotional" but come the fuck on. Even if you want to be "rational" and just look at hard monetary data you could just take the years lost, give them a price tag (average yearly salary * years accoun…

I think it somewhat strengthens the rest of the work. This is clearly not the answer the author wanted to find. And the bit about average number of days of life lost was a desperate attempt to hold on to his previous conclusion, before he looked at the numbers, that lockdowns were authoritarian overreactions. I don't think it's fundamentally wrong to measure healthcare effects with numerical measures like QALY, but i…

But what does losing 1-2 weeks of life really mean. It's a phrasing with intentionally reduced emotional impact. Let's say I was willing to sacrifice 3 months of my life to have avoided COVID lockdowns.

Reverse engineering that number, we get to 6 million covid deaths in the US, (1 million actual * 6 difference between 2 weeks to 3 months) and 87 million years of life lost. Converting all of that to 12 personal weeks of life lost, 1. Isn't what is actually at stake, it's a die roll and if you lose you die and 2. doesn't accurately account for the devastation. People are devastated when their loved ones lose their lives from COVID, it's not a few weeks of life lost 50 or so years from now.

132 million Americans were alive during World War 2. 300,000 of them died in the war, which is about the same ratio as COVID. But it's ok, because really it was just 2 weeks of life lost per person?

I’m not saying it’s too emotional to be data driven, I’m just saying the datapoints chosen are not equivalent.

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#125

Post by ZeroGravitas »

btilly wrote: post #109
geiser wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly what I thought. We have to learn to live in a community, and that means sacrificing personal liberty for the benefit of others.

And if we fail to be able to cope, what then? As https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/... and many other sources will attest, COVID and COVID lockdowns was TERRIBLE for mental health among teenagers. And yes, poor mental health is a communicable disease within a family. This is personal. 3/4 of my teenage children are receiving psychiatric care. Including a daughter who was temporarily institut…

This though is another example of "people/society should do X because it has a potential negative impact on other people".

Which I generally agree with. And it appears the person you replied to thinks like that as well.

The article on the other hand is arguing that we shouldn't do things differently to avoid impacts on people, because that reduces 'freedom', and he'd rather be free to go out during a pandemic than prevent people dying.

So he's only coincidentally on your side of this, because he opposes lockdowns and you feel the lockdown policies had an impact on your family that was negative.

But if you asked him if he'd do some minor thing to avoid physical or mental harm like that to other people in future, then he's already clearly stated his position on that. No, even widespread death of other people is not a reason for people to collectively avoid potential harm to others.

It just so happens that him not caring about other people's deaths coincides in this particular case with what you feel would have helped your family, but he's not arguing for what does the least harm overall. He's saying there's a principle at stake, and he's willing to let others die to uphold it.

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#126

Post by ZeroGravitas »

mikkergp wrote: post #124
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it somewhat strengthens the rest of the work. This is clearly not the answer the author wanted to find. And the bit about average number of days of life lost was a desperate attempt to hold on to his previous conclusion, before he looked at the numbers, that lockdowns were authoritarian overreactions. I don't think it's fundamentally wrong to measure healthcare effects with numerical measures like QALY, but i…

But what does losing 1-2 weeks of life really mean. It's a phrasing with intentionally reduced emotional impact. Let's say I was willing to sacrifice 3 months of my life to have avoided COVID lockdowns. Reverse engineering that number, we get to 6 million covid deaths in the US, (1 million actual * 6 difference between 2 weeks to 3 months) and 87 million years of life lost. Converting all of that to 12 personal weeks…

Yeah, sorry I agree that he was intentionally trying to downplay the deaths with that phrasing.

But, he did so because he'd already picked a side. I think if the numbers had came out the other way, he'd have happily stated "x million people died because of this pointless lockdown" and made it personal and emotional.

But the fact that he had to try to blunt the impact of his own numers in this way, in a weird way gives them more credibility. If a marketer put "90% fat free" on a food package rather than "10% fat" it provides some evidence that there is at least 10% fat in the product because someone has made the effort to try to minimize that fact.

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#127

Post by moistly »

btilly wrote: post #109
geiser wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly what I thought. We have to learn to live in a community, and that means sacrificing personal liberty for the benefit of others.

And if we fail to be able to cope, what then? As https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/... and many other sources will attest, COVID and COVID lockdowns was TERRIBLE for mental health among teenagers. And yes, poor mental health is a communicable disease within a family. This is personal. 3/4 of my teenage children are receiving psychiatric care. Including a daughter who was temporarily institut…

> I've spent a lot of hours of my daughter explaining very calmly why we should stop caring about her so she can die in peace.

Surely this is worded very poorly, and is not intended to say that you have been telling your daughter that you don’t care if she suicides. Because that would be monstrously cruel and quite possibly warrants prosecution per the Michelle Carter/Conrad Roy III case.

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#128

Post by pacerwpg »

OrvalWintermute wrote: post #121
pacerwpg wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

200,000 working age people in the US dying isn't nothing. It could also be explained by disabilities as a result of COVID and people unable to work as a result of that.

it could also be explained by All Cause Mortality being higher in vaccinated populations than unvaccinated (which, by the way, is the proper use of ACM when you compare two populations with a control).

Age adjusted or nah?

Turns out non-covid mortality is significantly higher in unvaccinated.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7043e2.htm

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#129

Post by OrvalWintermute »

pacerwpg wrote: post #128
OrvalWintermute wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it could also be explained by All Cause Mortality being higher in vaccinated populations than unvaccinated (which, by the way, is the proper use of ACM when you compare two populations with a control).

Age adjusted or nah? Turns out non-covid mortality is significantly higher in unvaccinated. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7043e2.htm

Sure

https://aapsonline.org/covid-19-more-shots-for-you-or-your-k...

https://excessburden.substack.com/p/all-cause-mortality-by-v...

Re: Covid “Fudge Factor” – A map of Covid data corruption and approach that worked

#130

Post by tzs »

didericis wrote: post #79
fabian2k wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if you can get reliable excess mortality data for China, without that this approach would obviously fail. But I think this specific analysis is also a bit more focused on the earlier parts of the pandemic, and before Omicron at least it looked like China's policy seemed to work well in terms of stopping the spread. With Omicron this seems much more dubious.

China’s policy never worked well and the various levels of mimicry of that policy across the world was responsible for the vast majority of the avoidable pandemic damage. Their lying about the obvious human to human transmission and repression of doctors speaking out is what prevented early containment, and their draconian lockdowns were both horribly repressive and ineffective. They made a big show to compensate for…

> The continued credulity of the west despite all of the lying China has done is astoundingly stupid. Anyone with an ounce of understanding of the culture and the government, particularly Xi’s government, was laughing at the Chinese figures and demanding on the ground access early on to determine what was actually happening.

How did China hide what was actually happening from foreigners at the 172 embassies in Beijing, and the 200+ consulate generals/consulate offices in the rest of the country, plus all the foreign business people who are in China long term?

Post reply on HN