The absurdity of "Covid case" statistics

Legion

Oderint dum metuant
iu



Yesterday's headlines announced Donald and Melania Trump "tested positive" for covid-19.

Another claimed nineteen thousand Amazon workers "got" covid-19 on the job.

Both of these pseudo-stories ignited another absurd frenzy of morbid speculation and finger-pointing.

As always, the story keeps changing:

  • Remember ventilators, flatten the curve, the next two weeks are crucial, etc.?
  • Remember Nancy Pelosi in Chinatown back in February, urging everyone to visit?
  • Remember Fauci dismissing masks as useless?

Why should we believe anything the media tells us now?

So what do these headlines really mean?

What exactly is a covid "case"?

Since the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak, most US media outlets have been exceedingly credulous and complicit in their reporting.

"Journalists" almost uniformly promote what the "pro-lock-down" narrative, which is to wildly exaggerate the risks from covid-19.

They may be motivated to hurt President Trump politically, to promote a more authoritarian "new normal" society, or simply to drive more clicks and views that add up to revenue. Bad news sells advertising.

This explains why media outlets use the terms "case" and "infection" so loosely, to the point of actively misinforming the public.

All of the endless talk about testing, testing, testing served to obscure two important facts.

First, the tests themselves are almost laughably unreliable in producing both false positives and negatives.

And what is the point? Are we going to test people again and again, every time they go out to the grocery or bump into a neighbor?

Second, detecting virus particles or droplets in a human's respiratory tract tells us very little. It certainly does not tell us if the person is sick.

Take a perfectly healthy person with no particular symptoms and swab the inside of their nose.

If the culture shows the presence of staphylococcus aureus, do we insist they have a staph infection?

A virus is not a disease. Viruses are microscopic parasites that lack the capacity to thrive and reproduce outside of a host body.

Only a very small percentage of those exposed to the virus itself—SARS-CoV-2—show any kind of acute respiratory symptoms, or what we can call "coronavirus disease."

The only meaningful statistics show the incidence of serious illness, hospitalizations, and deaths.

The single most important statistic among these is the infection fatality rate (IFR).

Data collected through July shows that the IFR for those under age forty-five is actually lower than that of the common flu.

The covid-19 IFR rises for those over fifty, but it is hardly a death sentence.

The data does not segregate those with preexisting health issues caused by obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.

Mild or asymptomatic covid cases are meaningless.

The world is full of viruses, and sometimes they make people a bit sick for a few days.

There are millions of them in the world all around us, on our skin, in our nose and respiratory tract, in our organs.

We are meant to live with them, which is why we all have immune systems designed to help us coexist and adapt to ever-changing organisms.

We develop antibodies naturally, or we attempt to stimulate them through vaccines, but ultimately our own immune systems will have to deal with covid-19.

The virus will always be out there waiting, on the other side of any lock-down, mask, or virus — so we might as well get on with our lives.

From day one the focus should have been on boosting immunity through exercise, fresh air, sunlight, proper dietary supplementation, and the promotion of general well-being.

Instead some politicians, many bureaucrats, and the opportunistic media insisted on lock-downs, school closures, distancing, isolation, masks etc.

As with almost everything in life, government intervention made the situation worse.

We can only hope many of the inept, unscientific despots are removed from office at the next election.

Several, including Tom Wolfe in Pennsylvania, Andrew Cuomo in New York and Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan, should face expulsion from office for their incompetence.

Lock-downs were never medically justified, either in terms of the covid-19 risk or the staggering economic tradeoffs.

They certainly are not justified now, given seven months of additional data showing that the transmission and lethality of covid-19 are not particularly worse than previous SARS, swine flu, or other pandemics.

We still don't know how many of the supposed two hundred thousand US covid-19 deaths were actually caused by the SARS-CoV-2 respiratory disease, or were just people who died of other causes after exposure to covid-19.

And we never will.



https://mises.org/wire/absurdity-covid-cases
 
iu



Yesterday's headlines announced Donald and Melania Trump "tested positive" for covid-19.

Another claimed nineteen thousand Amazon workers "got" covid-19 on the job.

Both of these pseudo-stories ignited another absurd frenzy of morbid speculation and finger-pointing.

As always, the story keeps changing:

  • Remember ventilators, flatten the curve, the next two weeks are crucial, etc.?
  • Remember Nancy Pelosi in Chinatown back in February, urging everyone to visit?
  • Remember Fauci dismissing masks as useless?

Why should we believe anything the media tells us now?

So what do these headlines really mean?

What exactly is a covid "case"?

Since the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak, most US media outlets have been exceedingly credulous and complicit in their reporting.

"Journalists" almost uniformly promote what the "pro-lock-down" narrative, which is to wildly exaggerate the risks from covid-19.

They may be motivated to hurt President Trump politically, to promote a more authoritarian "new normal" society, or simply to drive more clicks and views that add up to revenue. Bad news sells advertising.

This explains why media outlets use the terms "case" and "infection" so loosely, to the point of actively misinforming the public.

All of the endless talk about testing, testing, testing served to obscure two important facts.

First, the tests themselves are almost laughably unreliable in producing both false positives and negatives.

And what is the point? Are we going to test people again and again, every time they go out to the grocery or bump into a neighbor?

Second, detecting virus particles or droplets in a human's respiratory tract tells us very little. It certainly does not tell us if the person is sick.

Take a perfectly healthy person with no particular symptoms and swab the inside of their nose.

If the culture shows the presence of staphylococcus aureus, do we insist they have a staph infection?

A virus is not a disease. Viruses are microscopic parasites that lack the capacity to thrive and reproduce outside of a host body.

Only a very small percentage of those exposed to the virus itself—SARS-CoV-2—show any kind of acute respiratory symptoms, or what we can call "coronavirus disease."

The only meaningful statistics show the incidence of serious illness, hospitalizations, and deaths.

The single most important statistic among these is the infection fatality rate (IFR).

Data collected through July shows that the IFR for those under age forty-five is actually lower than that of the common flu.

The covid-19 IFR rises for those over fifty, but it is hardly a death sentence.

The data does not segregate those with preexisting health issues caused by obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.

Mild or asymptomatic covid cases are meaningless.

The world is full of viruses, and sometimes they make people a bit sick for a few days.

There are millions of them in the world all around us, on our skin, in our nose and respiratory tract, in our organs.

We are meant to live with them, which is why we all have immune systems designed to help us coexist and adapt to ever-changing organisms.

We develop antibodies naturally, or we attempt to stimulate them through vaccines, but ultimately our own immune systems will have to deal with covid-19.

The virus will always be out there waiting, on the other side of any lock-down, mask, or virus — so we might as well get on with our lives.

From day one the focus should have been on boosting immunity through exercise, fresh air, sunlight, proper dietary supplementation, and the promotion of general well-being.

Instead some politicians, many bureaucrats, and the opportunistic media insisted on lock-downs, school closures, distancing, isolation, masks etc.

As with almost everything in life, government intervention made the situation worse.

We can only hope many of the inept, unscientific despots are removed from office at the next election.

Several, including Tom Wolfe in Pennsylvania, Andrew Cuomo in New York and Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan, should face expulsion from office for their incompetence.

Lock-downs were never medically justified, either in terms of the covid-19 risk or the staggering economic tradeoffs.

They certainly are not justified now, given seven months of additional data showing that the transmission and lethality of covid-19 are not particularly worse than previous SARS, swine flu, or other pandemics.

We still don't know how many of the supposed two hundred thousand US covid-19 deaths were actually caused by the SARS-CoV-2 respiratory disease, or were just people who died of other causes after exposure to covid-19.

And we never will.



https://mises.org/wire/absurdity-covid-cases


low IQ opioid addicts like you shouldn't try and think You just aren't very good at it
 
Legion is a cherrypicker. Every time he runs into a article backing his preconceptions he threads it. This is just another one. It is not scientific and it is illogical. Sometimes simplistic. A virus is not a disease. Wow, thanks for that.
 
LOL. "Covid case". Anything they get a kickback from.

They couldn't keep screaming about overwhelmed hospitals and overflowing morgues forever.

Then we learn that testing labs were dialing up the cycles on covid testing way past the point of validity.

Up to 90 percent of the people who receive a positive test are carrying so little virus that they probably aren’t contagious.

This is because testing used something called a PCR test.

In this test, a test sample is run through a machine that amplifies any DNA particles found in it. Each time you run the sample through the machine you amplify the DNA a bit more.

In the current PCR testing, they run that sample through 40 times.

This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are.

In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.

On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a database maintained by The Times.

If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing.

The standard for these tests is 30-35 cycles.

By cycling to 40 times, it means we have positive infection counts that are about 10 times higher than they really are.

Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said

Epidemiologist Dr. Michael Mina from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health told The Times that a proper cutoff would be somewhere between 30-35 cycles. That would mean the amount of viral DNA in the sample would have to be 100 to 1,000 times higher to generate a positive result.

So this is, let's go with the vernacular, part of the "hoax".

We've been fed data that infectious cases are currently at 6.04 million when, because of the way this test is being done, may actually only be a little over 600,000.

But it may be even lower:

Officials at the Wadsworth Center, New York’s state lab, have access to C.T. values from tests they have processed, and analyzed their numbers at The Times’s request.

In July, the lab identified 794 positive tests, based on a threshold of 40 cycles.

With a cutoff of 35, about half of those tests would no longer qualify as positive. About 70 percent would no longer be judged positive if the cycles were limited to 30.

In Massachusetts, from 85 to 90 percent of people who tested positive in July with a cycle threshold of 40 would have been deemed negative if the threshold were 30 cycles, Dr. Mina said. “I would say that none of those people should be contact-traced, not one,” he said.

Other experts informed of these numbers were stunned.

The virus is most definitely real. The actual case count ... not so much.



https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
 
It put your invincible old Potus on his back in the hospital, stupid tard.

You didn't read the article, or didn't understand it.

BTW, his doctor says he's up and moving around, and working.

He just named Tom Fitton to a position.
 
I know you do.

Do you have any comment on the thread topic, or are you as intellectually bankrupt as you appear to be?

When lefties evade opening post topics, it is a picture worth a thousand words. They are telling us that they really wish they could post something of merit, but that they have to post something else to avoid commenting on political narratives that are inconvenient for them.
 
Legion is a cherrypicker. Every time he runs into a article backing his preconceptions he threads it. This is just another one. It is not scientific and it is illogical. Sometimes simplistic. A virus is not a disease. Wow, thanks for that.

Dodge, deflect, divert, invert, convert, redefine, or otherwise evade.
 
When lefties evade opening post topics, it is a picture worth a thousand words. They are telling us that they really wish they could post something of merit, but that they have to post something else to avoid commenting on political narratives that are inconvenient for them.

I suspect that you're correct.
 
Back
Top