Covid Vs US Average cause of death

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/1712761/

[90DayFinancier 910]

6 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/1712761/

Number 32, no number 16, wait number 12, no wait....oh sh...

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

4 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/1712761/

Sorry buddy, but that graphic demonstration, while appearing pretty neat, is very flawed and not reaLLY accurate.  Why?  The average number of daily deaths from heart disease is 1,774  EVERY SINGLE DAY ALL YEAR LONG, not just since March 1st.

 

So if you walk the numbers back to 1 Jan until now, covid deaths are 40,565, and heart disease is 193,366.  And covid is slowing down, whereas heart disease, cancer, etc. are not.

 

Aren't statistics great? 

Edited April 20, 2020 by Voice of Reason

[Just Paul 4,595]

17 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

Aren't statistics great? 

On average I can prove anything I want with statistics.

 

[90DayFinancier 910]

1 hour ago, Paul & Mary said:

On average I can prove anything I want with statistics.

 

Can you prove that Covid-19 is no more dangerous than the influenza we see every year?

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

3 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

Sorry buddy, but that graphic demonstration, while appearing pretty neat, is very flawed and not reaLLY accurate.  Why?  The average number of daily deaths from heart disease is 1,774  EVERY SINGLE DAY ALL YEAR LONG, not just since March 1st.

 

So if you walk the numbers back to 1 Jan until now, covid deaths are 40,565, and heart disease is 193,366.  And covid is slowing down, whereas heart disease, cancer, etc. are not.

 

Aren't statistics great? 

So wich of the numbers presented are not true?  None right.  

[Dashinka 24,505]

2 hours ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Can you prove that Covid-19 is no more dangerous than the influenza we see every year?

The numbers from Santa Clara Co. seem to indicate that.  With 50 to 85 times more residents showing some form of infection as compared to confirmed infections tends toward a mortality rate from 0.2 to 0.06%.

[Dashinka 24,505]

1 hour ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

So wich of the numbers presented are not true?  None right.  

All the others depicted in the gif.  You mean to tell me that every day shown the deaths due to heart disease or cancer did not also increase?  All this chart is showing is a progression of deaths with Covid19 increasing while keeping all the other causes constant.

 

 

Edited April 20, 2020 by Dashinka

[OriZ 3,157]

8 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

Sorry buddy, but that graphic demonstration, while appearing pretty neat, is very flawed and not reaLLY accurate.  Why?  The average number of daily deaths from heart disease is 1,774  EVERY SINGLE DAY ALL YEAR LONG, not just since March 1st.

 

So if you walk the numbers back to 1 Jan until now, covid deaths are 40,565, and heart disease is 193,366.  And covid is slowing down, whereas heart disease, cancer, etc. are not.

 

Aren't statistics great? 

Except...

 

1. We haven't seen the end of covid deaths - far from it. It takes time(sometimes several weeks) to die from covid. Right now there are 13,500 that are in serious condition, most of them will end up dying. That means at any point in time we have a "pool" for lack of a better word of at least another 1/3 added to the deaths that exist at that time. This doesn't include new cases which w e can still expect. 

 

2. covid deaths are additional, not in place of.

 

3. covid in the US didn't start as early as Jan 1. Even if there were a few unknown cases, as I said it's not like a heart related issue where the death is usually instant(assuming there is a death, not talking about a diagnosis of something that can take years to kill you), whereas with covid takes weeks. Assuming most deaths occured from cases that started around mid Feb...you should only compare since Mar 1.

 

4. Covid slowing down - why? is it not because of the measures you guys are so against? otherwise you bet we'd have already breathing down heart disease related death's neck.

 

So yup, statistics are great.

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2020 by OriZ

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

13 minutes ago, OriZ said:

Except...

 

1. We haven't seen the end of covid deaths - far from it. It takes time(sometimes several weeks) to die from covid. Right now there are 13,500 that are in serious condition, most of them will end up dying. That means at any point in time we have a "pool" for lack of a better word of at least another 1/3 added to the deaths that exist at that time. This doesn't include new cases which w e can still expect. 

 

2. covid deaths are additional, not in place of.

 

3. covid in the US didn't start as early as Jan 1. Even if there were a few unknown cases, as I said it's not like a heart related issue where the death is usually instant(assuming there is a death, not talking about a diagnosis of something that can take years to kill you), whereas with covid takes weeks. Assuming most deaths occured from cases that started around mid Feb...you should only compare since Mar 1.

 

4. Covid slowing down - why? is it not because of the measures you guys are so against? otherwise you bet we'd have already breathing down heart disease related death's neck.

 

So yup, statistics are great.

 

 

 

1. True, but so obvious I didn't see the need to say it.

2. Not true.

3. Yeah, I get that, but let's revisit this graphic in July, eh?  Let's see how the numbers compare then.

4. Because that's what diseases do, with or without any measures being taken, such as with the flu every year for the past 20 or so.  Has staying at home slowed the disease?  Sure it has.  It has ALSO slowed other death rates drastically which is great.  But are you saying we should keep this up all year, to save another ~80,000 or more Americans?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Also, covid was very likely inside the US well before the first death occurred.  Getting sick from it and dying from it are two different things.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

7 hours ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Can you prove that Covid-19 is no more dangerous than the influenza we see every year?

Prove?  How?  If you wish to use the hype & fear method, covid is much worse than any disease in the past 500,000 years.

 

If you want to go back to November, when covid started, there have been 85,774 P&I deaths in the US, and 40,620 covid deaths (which we all know is an inflated number, but it's all we have, so).  

 

Another metric to use is % of deaths. In NY, the area with the most deaths in the US, the rate of death per population is 0.094%.  The deaths from P&I based on US population is roughly 0.026%.  So NY covid is "more dangerous" than P&I.  But if you look at the US as a whole, the percentage of deaths from covid drops to 0.012%. or roughly half.

Which do YOU think is more dangerous?  And why?

Edited April 20, 2020 by Voice of Reason

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

1 minute ago, Voice of Reason said:

Prove?  How?  If you wish to use the hype & fear method, covid is much worse than any disease in the past 500,000 years.

 

If you want to go back to November, when covid started, there have been 85,774 P&I deaths in the US, and 40,620 covid deaths (which we all know is an inflated number, but it's all we have, so).  

 

Another metric to use is % of deaths. In NY, the area with the most deaths in the US, the rate of death per population is 0.094%.  The deaths from P&I based on US population is roughly 0.026%.  So NY covid is "more dangerous" than P&I.  But if you look at the US as a whole, the percentage of deaths from covid drops to 0.012%. or roughly half.

Which do YOU think is more dangerous?  And why?

You said the numbers are wrong. Waiting on a link 

[OriZ 3,157]

46 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

1. True, but so obvious I didn't see the need to say it.

2. Not true.

3. Yeah, I get that, but let's revisit this graphic in July, eh?  Let's see how the numbers compare then.

4. Because that's what diseases do, with or without any measures being taken, such as with the flu every year for the past 20 or so.  Has staying at home slowed the disease?  Sure it has.  It has ALSO slowed other death rates drastically which is great.  But are you saying we should keep this up all year, to save another ~80,000 or more Americans?

I never once suggested we should keep it up all year...I said we had a fire to put out and couldn't just use a sprinkler anymore because we didn't start using the sprinkler on time. We now have control over the fire but we haven't put it out yet. As I wrote last night in another thread, I think starting to ease in about 2 weeks would make the most sense. To me, anyway. 

 

I think this should have given us ample time to plan and prepare for life "alongside corona" with different, less severe measures that we can live with longer, unfortunately I don't see that we used that time wisely. I don't think we'll even be ready in 2 weeks, but we'll probably be as ready as we're going to be.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

26 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

You said the numbers are wrong. Waiting on a link 

That is not at all what I said.