I put my faith in statisticians who do the math showing excessive deaths by countries and states compared to similar time periods in the past.
Covid Death Statistics are Inaccurate
- Thread starter Tsing Tao
- Start date
I put my faith in statisticians who do the math showing excessive deaths by countries and states compared to similar time periods in the past.
The number of infected is vastly understated from the perspective of most people who have studied statistics.
I put my faith in statistics not "experts" because any thinking person knows that when the denominator is actually much larger the percentage goes significantly lower.
My daughter covered that in her 4th grade class 2 weeks ago.
its axiomatic...
Your appeal to the experts ( your logical fallacy by the way) can not change statistical laws.
And don't come back with your stupid... case rate vs infected rate...
We told you your data sucked from the beginning... we were not confused.
You fell for bad models based on bad data... not us.
I put my faith in statistics not "experts" because any thinking person knows that when the denominator is actually much larger the percentage goes significantly lower.
My daughter covered that in her 4th grade class 2 weeks ago.
its axiomatic...
Your appeal to the experts ( your logical fallacy by the way) can not change statistical laws.
And don't come back with your stupid... case rate vs infected rate...
We told you your data sucked from the beginning... we were not confused.
You fell for bad models based on bad data... not us.
There is the New York Times article and many other articles showing the excess deaths by state that have not been reported at COVID-19 deaths.
How accurate is the US coronavirus death count? Some experts say it's off by 'tens of thousands'
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/accurate-us-coronavirus-death-count-experts-off-tens/story?id=70385359
The novel coronavirus has already claimed the lives of more than 61,000 Americans. But experts fear that number could be far higher at this point in the outbreak -- perhaps by tens of thousands -- once the pandemic subsides enough for officials to go back and make a true reckoning of the dead.
Known data artifacts:
1) Early deaths due to Covid not being booked as Covid deaths.
2) Deaths unrelated to Covid are being booked as Covid deaths. There are cancer patients who have had multiple negative test results but then expired and their death was booked as Covid related.
3) Lack of testing of people diagnosed by their doctor as likely infected.
The ability to get to accurate numbers on key figures of merit have been obscured beyond recovery.
The best practices for disease mitigation are not the same as the best practices for data collection. It seems like China was too busy trying to mitigate and dispose of bodies to keep count. Our situation is not all that different.
1) Early deaths due to Covid not being booked as Covid deaths.
2) Deaths unrelated to Covid are being booked as Covid deaths. There are cancer patients who have had multiple negative test results but then expired and their death was booked as Covid related.
3) Lack of testing of people diagnosed by their doctor as likely infected.
The ability to get to accurate numbers on key figures of merit have been obscured beyond recovery.
The best practices for disease mitigation are not the same as the best practices for data collection. It seems like China was too busy trying to mitigate and dispose of bodies to keep count. Our situation is not all that different.
From the article you just posted:
"We need to have the testing available because the big question now with COVID-19 is the denominator -- of anything," said Dr. Alex Williamson of the College of American Pathologists. "How many people get it? How many people recover? How many are hospitalized? How many died? We don't know the true denominator. More testing is the most important thing we need to do."
Obviously, this is why this journalist is not a data scientist. You can't blame them though, they need a headline people want to read.
See little Billy...it is the denominator we are highly uncertain about. Back in first grade little Billy we learned:
See little Billy, since we are not testing everyone we are not counting all the people that should be part of the denominator. This is making the fatality rate seem much more scary than it would be if we were testing everyone. This has nothing to do with the numerator.
It will be ok little Billy.
You should take this as a lesson for when you are a big boy that so often journalist just don't know what they are talking about. That is why it is better to just get the data yourself and come to your own conclusions.
How accurate is the US coronavirus death count? Some experts say it's off by 'tens of thousands'
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/accurate-us-coronavirus-death-count-experts-off-tens/story?id=70385359
"We need to have the testing available because the big question now with COVID-19 is the denominator -- of anything," said Dr. Alex Williamson of the College of American Pathologists. "How many people get it? How many people recover? How many are hospitalized? How many died? We don't know the true denominator. More testing is the most important thing we need to do."
Obviously, this is why this journalist is not a data scientist. You can't blame them though, they need a headline people want to read.
See little Billy...it is the denominator we are highly uncertain about. Back in first grade little Billy we learned:
See little Billy, since we are not testing everyone we are not counting all the people that should be part of the denominator. This is making the fatality rate seem much more scary than it would be if we were testing everyone. This has nothing to do with the numerator.
It will be ok little Billy.
You should take this as a lesson for when you are a big boy that so often journalist just don't know what they are talking about. That is why it is better to just get the data yourself and come to your own conclusions.
How accurate is the US coronavirus death count? Some experts say it's off by 'tens of thousands'
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/accurate-us-coronavirus-death-count-experts-off-tens/story?id=70385359
Last edited:
From the article you just posted:
"We need to have the testing available because the big question now with COVID-19 is the denominator -- of anything," said Dr. Alex Williamson of the College of American Pathologists. "How many people get it? How many people recover? How many are hospitalized? How many died? We don't know the true denominator. More testing is the most important thing we need to do."
Obviously, this is why this journalist is not a data scientist. You can't blame them though, they need a headline people want to read.
See little Billy...it is the denominator we are highly uncertain about. Back in first grade little Billy we learned:
See little Billy, since we are not testing everyone we are not counting all the people that should be part of the denominator. This is making the fatality rate seem much more scary than it would be if we were testing everyone. This has nothing to do with the numerator.
It will be ok little Billy.
You should take this as a lesson for when you are a big boy that so often journalist just don't know what they are talking about.
How accurate is the US coronavirus death count? Some experts say it's off by 'tens of thousands'
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/accurate-us-coronavirus-death-count-experts-off-tens/story?id=70385359
Yes, while you ignore the numerator is off by tens of thousands as deaths are under-counted.
That is utter BS when doctors are counting everyone that ends up dead as Corona Virus related. More likely, Corona Virus deaths are far less than actually reported. These are other doctors saying that deaths are misclassified deliberately. Maybe, for larger reimbursement rates from the government or to drive an agenda. Statistics are just estimates and not actually, the people who died. Of course, liberal hacks can make statistics up their asses without any hard data. The only two figures we know with certainty is the number of dead bodies counted as Corona Virus related and two, the actual cases of Corona Virus among all those tested and turned out positive. Anything else, is pure conjecture.
Statistics are made up figures. No difference when they projected Hillary Clinton with a 98% chance of winning the US Presidential elections of November 8, 2016. That is statistics in a nutshell. In there are modern day quacks, it is these so called statisticians being branded as experts. Spare us the nonsense.
Yeah, the biggest liars around. Political hacks of the New York Times and we should believe them blindly? Why, because the idiots said so?
We should believe them because the statistics from states fully back their information, and other sources provide the same information. All citing the raw sources where they obtained the information from.