Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Winnipesaukee Forums > Covid-19 Discussions & Information
Home Forums Gallery Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Links Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-31-2020, 10:08 AM   #1
MAXUM
Senior Member
 
MAXUM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hooksett, NH & Bear Island, NH
Posts: 2,397
Thanks: 232
Thanked 1,635 Times in 666 Posts
Default Latest from the CDC

I will point out updated numbers from the CDC which is showing a newly revised average mortality rate of .004% which I will opine is a very conservative number as the known exposure rate is still a relative unknown but the numbers in that regard continue to rise at such a significant rate the mortality rate will continue to fall. Here is the "official" break down by age group:

Age Group : Mortality Rate

0-49: 0.0005
50-64: 0.002
65+: 0.013
Overall: 0.004

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...scenarios.html

I have said all along and some have scoffed at my saying so, that the numbers (based on first hand knowledge of ongoing COVID studies) are showing and continue to show it is not as deadly as early indications seemed to have indicated. I can tell you these numbers as reported by the CDC are estimates and very conservative however as the data continues to pour in they will likely be further revised downwards. Like any kind of statistical data gathering it takes time to compile the numbers to reach such conclusions.

What is known right now is quite interesting when you consider this information is being fed into the CDC and is being shared with those that are making decisions on public policy regarding what the public is "allowed" to do.

You can reach your own conclusions on why we continue to see extensions of forced business closures and lockdowns - especially when the data is also showing "social distancing", wearing of face masks (with a few exceptions) and isolation is widely ineffective.
MAXUM is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to MAXUM For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (05-31-2020), Chris M (05-31-2020), gravy boat (06-01-2020), ishoot308 (05-31-2020), joey2665 (05-31-2020), jogator1 (06-01-2020), Major (05-31-2020), MRD (05-31-2020), pjard (06-01-2020), Reilly (06-02-2020), SAMIAM (06-01-2020), Sue Doe-Nym (05-31-2020), watermaker (05-31-2020)
Old 05-31-2020, 06:55 PM   #2
granitebox
Senior Member
 
granitebox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Steamboat Springs - Bear Island
Posts: 108
Thanks: 69
Thanked 68 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Me thinks your decimal point is in the wrong location based upon collaborative CDC data....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
granitebox is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to granitebox For This Useful Post:
Newbiesaukee (06-01-2020), TCC (05-31-2020)
Old 05-31-2020, 07:04 PM   #3
FlyingScot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tuftonboro and Sudbury, MA
Posts: 900
Thanks: 533
Thanked 388 Times in 229 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAXUM View Post
I will point out updated numbers from the CDC which is showing a newly revised average mortality rate of .004% which I will opine is a very conservative number as the known exposure rate is still a relative unknown but the numbers in that regard continue to rise at such a significant rate the mortality rate will continue to fall. Here is the "official" break down by age group:

Age Group : Mortality Rate

0-49: 0.0005
50-64: 0.002
65+: 0.013
Overall: 0.004

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...scenarios.html

I have said all along and some have scoffed at my saying so, that the numbers (based on first hand knowledge of ongoing COVID studies) are showing and continue to show it is not as deadly as early indications seemed to have indicated. I can tell you these numbers as reported by the CDC are estimates and very conservative however as the data continues to pour in they will likely be further revised downwards. Like any kind of statistical data gathering it takes time to compile the numbers to reach such conclusions.

What is known right now is quite interesting when you consider this information is being fed into the CDC and is being shared with those that are making decisions on public policy regarding what the public is "allowed" to do.

You can reach your own conclusions on why we continue to see extensions of forced business closures and lockdowns - especially when the data is also showing "social distancing", wearing of face masks (with a few exceptions) and isolation is widely ineffective.
Hi Maxum,

I cannot find the actual data you used from the site you linked. Can you cut and paste a chart so we can see if granite is correct? Thanks
FlyingScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2020, 08:11 AM   #4
Lakegeezer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Moultonboro, NH
Posts: 1,530
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 294
Thanked 510 Times in 227 Posts
Default Scenario planning infomation

The linked report from the CDC was not dated, but appears to have been published around May 20'th. Some interesting data there. Not official numbers, but best estimates to be used for scenario planning. What caught my eye was the best estimate for R0, the spreading ratio. They set it at 2.5, meaning on average, those who catch it spread it to 2.5 people. That is a recipe for a return to epidemic growth. A low ratio of deaths among those with symptoms is still a problem if 10's of millions more people catch it.

There is a epidemic calculator at https://gabgoh.github.io/COVID/ where you can plug in the CDC numbers and come up with your own scenarios. After playing with it for a while, it appears that there are scenarios where the lakes region is not out of the woods yet, having seen less than 15% of what the total death count could be.

The paper is worth a read though. New information about time from exposure to symptoms, infectious period, percentage with no symptoms, hospital stay lengths and some morbidity topics.
__________________
-lg
Lakegeezer is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Lakegeezer For This Useful Post:
Newbiesaukee (06-01-2020)
Old 06-01-2020, 08:38 AM   #5
Cal-to-NH
Member
 
Cal-to-NH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 49
Thanks: 2
Thanked 33 Times in 12 Posts
Default Fatality ratios

This is what the data means:

4 of 1000 people who show symptoms of the disease die.

35% of people asymptomatic means there are a lot of people walking around that don't know they have it. Be aware this is not only highly unusual, but also greatly increases the number of spreaders that are out there

R-sub 0 of 2.5 means that it's transmission spreads 2.5 times greater than influenza (R-sub-0 of influenza is around 1)

Bottom-line is there are a lot of people who are spreading it (through no fault - they don't know they are doing it!), and the transmission rate is exceptionally high

Funny how some think this isn't a big deal.
Cal-to-NH is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Cal-to-NH For This Useful Post:
chasedawg (06-01-2020), ebko87 (06-01-2020), Newbiesaukee (06-01-2020), TCC (06-01-2020), Whimsey (06-01-2020)
Sponsored Links
Old 06-01-2020, 12:11 PM   #6
jogator1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 66
Thanks: 42
Thanked 15 Times in 8 Posts
Default

There is certainly new information coming out daily from around the world as we continue to learn about this novel virus. There are indications that the virus may not be as contagious as previously thought during asymptomatic cases or during incubation times as the viral load is considerably weaker. There is a study out of California that showed less contagion during asymptomatic times. There is also a report out of Germany agreeing. This is significant as people can quarantine if showing symptoms greatly reducing spread and threat of second wave.

There is also a report out of Italy indicating the virus may be losing its potency thereby weakening COVID-19.

This is definitely an optimistic post as I tend to be a glass is half full person. It looks like we are turning the corner in our battle against this virus and a second wave is far from a guarantee.
jogator1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2020, 04:50 PM   #7
Cal-to-NH
Member
 
Cal-to-NH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 49
Thanks: 2
Thanked 33 Times in 12 Posts
Default Not a certainty - but probably will come back

I agree anything can happen. Nevertheless it more than likely will be back. See my post on a separate thread...

Last edited by Cal-to-NH; 06-01-2020 at 05:44 PM. Reason: clarity
Cal-to-NH is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Cal-to-NH For This Useful Post:
Newbiesaukee (06-01-2020)
Old 06-01-2020, 05:52 PM   #8
gravy boat
Senior Member
 
gravy boat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Gilford yr round, W. Alton and Bears' Den for summers
Posts: 521
Thanks: 502
Thanked 168 Times in 81 Posts
Default Will be interesting to see....

...how many outbreaks of Covid will result from the riots. Few are wearing masks so if what we've been told is accurate then there WILL be huge outbreaks in the riot cities. No mask = outbreak. Especially in highly populated areas.
gravy boat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2020, 06:41 PM   #9
Hillcountry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: In the hills
Posts: 2,084
Thanks: 1,343
Thanked 672 Times in 394 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gravy boat View Post
...how many outbreaks of Covid will result from the riots. Few are wearing masks so if what we've been told is accurate then there WILL be huge outbreaks in the riot cities. No mask = outbreak. Especially in highly populated areas.
I think the Chinese virus reporting has moved to the “2nd hand news” category...
Hillcountry is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Hillcountry For This Useful Post:
Givemethewholeclam (06-01-2020)
Old 06-02-2020, 07:59 AM   #10
rsmlp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 405
Thanks: 5
Thanked 140 Times in 68 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal-to-NH View Post
This is what the data means:

4 of 1000 people who show symptoms of the disease die.

35% of people asymptomatic means there are a lot of people walking around that don't know they have it. Be aware this is not only highly unusual, but also greatly increases the number of spreaders that are out there

R-sub 0 of 2.5 means that it's transmission spreads 2.5 times greater than influenza (R-sub-0 of influenza is around 1)

Bottom-line is there are a lot of people who are spreading it (through no fault - they don't know they are doing it!), and the transmission rate is exceptionally high

Funny how some think this isn't a big deal.
Just to be clear, .004% is 4 in 100,000 NOT 1,000.
rsmlp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2020, 08:21 AM   #11
Newbiesaukee
Senior Member
 
Newbiesaukee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Coral Gables, winter; Long Island, summer
Posts: 1,099
Thanks: 680
Thanked 420 Times in 211 Posts
Default

The original poster, unintentionally I assume, confused ratio with percentage. 0.4% (or 4 in 1,000 ) is correct. This had been previously noted in this thread.
__________________


"You're only young once, but you can be immature forever."
Newbiesaukee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2020, 08:29 AM   #12
rsmlp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 405
Thanks: 5
Thanked 140 Times in 68 Posts
Default WorldOmeter

According to WorldOmeter, the current death rate in the US is 323 per million of Americans which is .0323%. Of course, this is an estimate and could be high or low based on what you want to believe.
rsmlp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2020, 09:06 AM   #13
Newbiesaukee
Senior Member
 
Newbiesaukee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Coral Gables, winter; Long Island, summer
Posts: 1,099
Thanks: 680
Thanked 420 Times in 211 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rsmlp View Post
According to WorldOmeter, the current death rate in the US is 323 per million of Americans which is .0323%. Of course, this is an estimate and could be high or low based on what you want to believe.
You are confusing things. The number that this thread is about is the risk of dying IF you get sick from the virus. The death rate you are you are referencing above is the number of deaths per the entire population, not the chance of dying if u get sick.

Actually, the Worldometer Mortality rate in the US and the Johns Hopkins mortality rate is about 100,000 US deaths with 1.8 million cases which is about a case mortality rate of 5.8%.

This is at odds with the CDC numbers but that is a different issue.

I am only discussing math, not what the real numbers are.
__________________


"You're only young once, but you can be immature forever."
Newbiesaukee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2020, 06:58 PM   #14
Cal-to-NH
Member
 
Cal-to-NH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 49
Thanks: 2
Thanked 33 Times in 12 Posts
Default Why is data so hard to interpret?

For anyone who looks at the data, it is NOT expressed in percentages. So as some of you have correctly picked up it is 4 in 1000.
Cal-to-NH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2020, 08:52 AM   #15
granitebox
Senior Member
 
granitebox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Steamboat Springs - Bear Island
Posts: 108
Thanks: 69
Thanked 68 Times in 26 Posts
Default

The challenge is obvious.

Liars figure and figures lie.

People will present any data in a light that supports their position - no one is going to present negative data when they voice and opinion so the challenge is always:

1. When pronouns are used such as "they" or "them" we need to determine the actual source, generic pronouns are near useless to me, I always need the who.

2. I also verify the data - in this case the data was presented but the OP didn't do the math right and presented a number that supported his view and wasn't the data presented by the original source.

In the end, I'm skeptical of all information until I can verify it myself. Unfortunately it's the way of the world and it's been that way for me long before our current president.
granitebox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2020, 05:13 PM   #16
Chris M
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: NH
Posts: 46
Thanks: 53
Thanked 49 Times in 21 Posts
Default

Is it true that the average age of those who die from covid19 is older than the average age that folks die in the US?

If that's true does anyone have any regrets in the way this has been handled?
Chris M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2020, 08:25 PM   #17
Cal-to-NH
Member
 
Cal-to-NH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Moultonborough
Posts: 49
Thanks: 2
Thanked 33 Times in 12 Posts
Default What?

I don't get the stream of consciousness...

You have two complete thoughts that don't relate to each other at all. Maybe you can expand?

Is it true that the sky is blue?
If it is, do you have regrets about eating too much ice cream?
Cal-to-NH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2020, 08:57 PM   #18
8gv
Senior Member
 
8gv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,353
Thanks: 34
Thanked 443 Times in 285 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal-to-NH View Post
Is it true that the sky is blue?
If it is, do you have regrets about eating too much ice cream?
That's what they want you to believe!

I just go along with the blue sky theory so I can get more ice cream.
8gv is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.18004 seconds