Corona Virus Peak Watch Thread

There's a lot of peer-review in the scientific and medical communities. The CDC is using the same methods they always do and would take a huge hit to their credibility world-wide if they politicized a pandemic.

When it comes to believing a politician or a general on a military matter, I'll always believe the general.

When it comes to believing a politician or a scientist on a scientific matter, I'll always believe the scientist.

When it comes to believing a politician or a doctor on a medical issue, I'll always believe the doctor.

All people are human and make mistakes, but politicians are professional liars and bullshitters just like lawyers which explains the ratings in this poll about honesty and ethics in different professions:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics-professions.aspx

The global reputation of the CDC is already greatly wrecked.....under what rock have you been?
 
There's a lot of peer-review in the scientific and medical communities. The CDC is using the same methods they always do and would take a huge hit to their credibility world-wide if they politicized a pandemic.

When it comes to believing a politician or a general on a military matter, I'll always believe the general.

When it comes to believing a politician or a scientist on a scientific matter, I'll always believe the scientist.

When it comes to believing a politician or a doctor on a medical issue, I'll always believe the doctor.

All people are human and make mistakes, but politicians are professional liars and bullshitters just like lawyers which explains the ratings in this poll about honesty and ethics in different professions:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics-professions.aspx

In this case we are only concerned with what the CDC is doing and reporting.
 
Hello Dutch Uncle,

There's a lot of peer-review in the scientific and medical communities. The CDC is using the same methods they always do and would take a huge hit to their credibility world-wide if they politicized a pandemic.

When it comes to believing a politician or a general on a military matter, I'll always believe the general.

When it comes to believing a politician or a scientist on a scientific matter, I'll always believe the scientist.

When it comes to believing a politician or a doctor on a medical issue, I'll always believe the doctor.

All people are human and make mistakes, but politicians are professional liars and bullshitters just like lawyers which explains the ratings in this poll about honesty and ethics in different professions:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics-professions.aspx

Great link. I enjoyed seeing that, gaining insight. Thanks.
 
Indeed. He agrees that the CDC (the science guys) states on their site that they are combining presumed and confirmed case stats into one inflated confirmed total.

Do you have a link to the actual quote? It's non-scientific and immoral to inflate numbers. It's the same as fabricating facts or paying someone to take your SATs. It's worse than cheating at golf.
 
Do you have a link to the actual quote?

Been posting them since April.

***************

How are cases reported?

We have three levels of case definition: suspected, probable and confirmed cases. What is measured and reported by governments and international organizations?

International organizations – namely the WHO and European CDC – report case figures submitted by national governments. Wherever possible they aim to report confirmed cases, for two key reasons:

1. They have a higher degree of certainty because they have laboratory confirmation;

2. They held to provide standardised comparisons between countries.

However, international bodies can only provide figures as submitted by national governments and reporting institutions. Countries can define slightly different criteria for how cases are defined and reported.4 Some countries have, over the course of the outbreak, changed their reporting methodologies to also include probable cases.

One example of this is the United States. Until 14th April the US CDC provided daily reports on the number of confirmed cases. However, as of 14th April, it now provides a single figure of cases: the sum of confirmed and probable.

Suspected case figures are usually not reported. The European CDC notes that suspected cases should not be reported at the European level (although countries may record this information for national records) but are used to understand who should be tested for the disease.
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases?country=~USA#how-are-cases-reported

***************

ICD-10-CM Official Coding and Reporting Guidelines
April 1, 2020 through September 30, 2020
1. Chapter 1: Certain Infectious and Parasitic Diseases (A00-B99)
g. Coronavirus Infections
1) COVID-19 Infections (Infections due to SARS-CoV-2)
a) Code only confirmed cases
Code only a confirmed diagnosis of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) as
documented by the provider, documentation of a positive COVID-19 test result, or a
presumptive positive COVID-19 test result. For a confirmed diagnosis, assign code
U07.1, COVID-19. This is an exception to the hospital inpatient guideline Section II, H.
In this context, “confirmation” does not require documentation of the type of test
performed; the provider’s documentation that the individual has COVID-19 is sufficient.
Presumptive positive COVID-19 test results should be coded as confirmed. A
presumptive positive test result means an individual has tested positive for the virus at a
local or state level, but it has not yet been confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC). CDC confirmation of local and state tests for COVID-19 is no
longer required.
 
Been posting them since April.

***************

How are cases reported?

We have three levels of case definition: suspected, probable and confirmed cases. What is measured and reported by governments and international organizations?

International organizations – namely the WHO and European CDC – report case figures submitted by national governments. Wherever possible they aim to report confirmed cases, for two key reasons:

1. They have a higher degree of certainty because they have laboratory confirmation;

2. They held to provide standardised comparisons between countries.

However, international bodies can only provide figures as submitted by national governments and reporting institutions. Countries can define slightly different criteria for how cases are defined and reported.4 Some countries have, over the course of the outbreak, changed their reporting methodologies to also include probable cases.

One example of this is the United States. Until 14th April the US CDC provided daily reports on the number of confirmed cases. However, as of 14th April, it now provides a single figure of cases: the sum of confirmed and probable.

Suspected case figures are usually not reported. The European CDC notes that suspected cases should not be reported at the European level (although countries may record this information for national records) but are used to understand who should be tested for the disease.
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases?country=~USA#how-are-cases-reported

***************

ICD-10-CM Official Coding and Reporting Guidelines
April 1, 2020 through September 30, 2020
1. Chapter 1: Certain Infectious and Parasitic Diseases (A00-B99)
g. Coronavirus Infections
1) COVID-19 Infections (Infections due to SARS-CoV-2)
a) Code only confirmed cases
Code only a confirmed diagnosis of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) as
documented by the provider, documentation of a positive COVID-19 test result, or a
presumptive positive COVID-19 test result. For a confirmed diagnosis, assign code
U07.1, COVID-19. This is an exception to the hospital inpatient guideline Section II, H.
In this context, “confirmation” does not require documentation of the type of test
performed; the provider’s documentation that the individual has COVID-19 is sufficient.
Presumptive positive COVID-19 test results should be coded as confirmed. A
presumptive positive test result means an individual has tested positive for the virus at a
local or state level, but it has not yet been confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC). CDC confirmation of local and state tests for COVID-19 is no
longer required.

Thanks. So you believe that a person who tests positive for COVID but the test hasn't been confirmed by the CDC shouldn't be listed as a case of COVID? I fail to see the problem. A total is fine but the presumptive positive tests should be broken out as a subset. Is that what they are doing or not?

Why do you think this point is so important?
 
A 2020 survey of honesty and ethics by profession. Nurses, Engineers and Doctors are the top three. Senators, Members of Congress and car salespeople are the bottom three. People are free to trust who they like and distrust who they like. My trusts are aligned with the poll.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/274673/nurses-continue-rate-highest-honesty-ethics.aspx


This link is from 2018 and is still close. Congress moved up above car salespeople. Woot!
https://news.gallup.com/poll/245597/nurses-again-outpace-professions-honesty-ethics.aspx
ec2j8lsovke2ymmkqgtwdg.png
 
Thanks. So you believe that a person who tests positive for COVID but the test hasn't been confirmed by the CDC shouldn't be listed as a case of COVID? I fail to see the problem. A total is fine but the presumptive positive tests should be broken out as a subset. Is that what they are doing or not?

Why do you think this point is so important?

Back the way the ECDC does it. All cases should be properly and distinctly labeled. Here are all the probable cases...and over here are the confirmed cases. Not added together.
Possible example:
A doctor see 30 patients. They all get a Covid test. At the end of the day it turns out that 25 are fine. 2 are confirmed positive. 3 others are presumed (with no lab evidence).
As of April the CDC counts it 5 confirmed cases.

*****
Even the CSTE recommended that the 2 stats should be shown separately in the media/press..............of course the CDC wants none of that.

Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists
Interim-20-ID-01B. Criteria to distinguish a new case of this disease or condition from reports or notifications which should not be enumerated as a new case for surveillance
N/A until more virologic data are available.
VIII. Period of Surveillance
Ongoing
IX.
Data sharing/release and print criteria
CSTE recommends the following case statuses* be included in the ‘case’ count released outside of the public health agency:
☒Confirmed
☒Probable
☐Suspect
☐Unknown
 
Since Trump has blown them off, does it matter?

The inflated stats have put this particular nation into fear, stress and panic...not to mention an economic uproar.
The masses are more easily controlled by those on the left that stoke citizens' fears of disease, death and ruin.
 
Back the way the ECDC does it. All cases should be properly and distinctly labeled. Here are all the probable cases...and over here are the confirmed cases. Not added together.
Possible example:
A doctor see 30 patients. They all get a Covid test. At the end of the day it turns out that 25 are fine. 2 are confirmed positive. 3 others are presumed (with no lab evidence).....

Your quote says "Presumptive positive COVID-19 test results should be coded as confirmed. A
presumptive positive test result means an individual has tested positive for the virus
at a
local or state level, but it has not yet been confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC). CDC confirmation of local and state tests for COVID-19 is no
longer required.
"

You even bolded it. Do you understand that they are saying the person tested positive?
 
Your quote says "Presumptive positive COVID-19 test results should be coded as confirmed. A
presumptive positive test result means an individual has tested positive for the virus
at a
local or state level, but it has not yet been confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC). CDC confirmation of local and state tests for COVID-19 is no
longer required.
"

You even bolded it. Do you understand that they are saying the person tested positive?

It's not "confirmed". That's the point.
 
There's a lot of peer-review in the scientific and medical communities. The CDC is using the same methods they always do and would take a huge hit to their credibility world-wide if they politicized a pandemic.

When it comes to believing a politician or a general on a military matter, I'll always believe the general.

When it comes to believing a politician or a scientist on a scientific matter, I'll always believe the scientist.

When it comes to believing a politician or a doctor on a medical issue, I'll always believe the doctor.

All people are human and make mistakes, but politicians are professional liars and bullshitters just like lawyers which explains the ratings in this poll about honesty and ethics in different professions:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics-professions.aspx

Well said. I do think the CDC has suffered from politicization. However, I will go with their stats over -- as you said -- a politician or a moron on a chat board. As many a president has discovered, in government it is *very* difficult to pull of a conspiracy and not get caught. The CDC is composed of scientists, physicians, even statisticians and mathematicians. Stretch and her RW sources? Meh.

Isn't it interesting, in the poll you cited, how far down the trusted list are clergy? I wonder why *that* is? :rolleyes: The most trusted ppl have scientific educations.
 
The global reputation of the CDC is already greatly wrecked.....under what rock have you been?

Only in the minds of you Reichtards, and at the hands of your glorious orange shitgibbon. Yep, they've been politicized all right. How odd I haven't noticed you Reichtards screaming about their newly-issued back-to-school guidelines? Why's that?
 
Thanks. So you believe that a person who tests positive for COVID but the test hasn't been confirmed by the CDC shouldn't be listed as a case of COVID? I fail to see the problem. A total is fine but the presumptive positive tests should be broken out as a subset. Is that what they are doing or not?

Why do you think this point is so important?

It was my impression that Stretch thinks that the deaths are inflated as well as the positive cases. As for the why is it important -- the numbers make the Mango Messiah look bad. When he looks bad, he won't get re-elected. When he doesn't get re-elected, he won't be able to bring about God's Kingdom on Earth, the End Times, the tribulations, blah blah blah. Keep in mind that this is a person who, on this very forum, predicted that the world would end on a specific time and date and oops.
 
And there is also this, as to why some of our lesser-cognitively-endowed RW friends want to pretend that the COVID-19 deaths are vastly inflated:

BC7QtWJ.jpg
 
Back
Top