Jonkman Microblog
  • Login
Show Navigation
  • Public

    • Public
    • Network
    • Groups
    • Popular
    • People

Conversation

Notices

  1. lnxw48a1 (lnxw48a1@nu.federati.net)'s status on Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 18:23:51 EDT lnxw48a1 lnxw48a1
    bttps://www.scientificamerican.con/article/the-pandemics-hidden-toll-is-revealed-in-excess-death-counts/ [www scientificamerican com]

    Many unexpected US deaths not recorded as #COVID-19 deaths. Authors speculate that many may have been directly or indirectly caused by the #SARS-CoV-2 #coronavirus. #2019-nCoV
    In conversation Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 18:23:51 EDT from nu.federati.net permalink
    1. GeniusMusing (geniusmusing@nu.federati.net)'s status on Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 20:01:30 EDT GeniusMusing GeniusMusing
      in reply to
      @lnxw48a1
      I would have to guess that on an overall average the number reported is probably close to accurate for the US. While many were not reported as being C-19 related (Texass and Floriduh come to mind) regardless of actual C-19 death, others like Oregon were counting any death that tested positive regardless of actual cause.

      Can't find the source but I am pretty sure I read about a person had tested positive a few days before but died in a car accident (as a result of the accident) as being counted as C-19 related.

      One thing I have found about statistics is that with a given set of information you can make almost anything plausible if there are enough options/data sets. I also wonder (didn't read it all) if they took into account the very reduced normal flu death since masking was implemented, that alone could cause data issues.
      In conversation Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 20:01:30 EDT from nu.federati.net permalink
      1. lnxw48a1 (lnxw48a1@nu.federati.net)'s status on Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 20:28:17 EDT lnxw48a1 lnxw48a1
        in reply to
        @geniusmusing

        > ... took into account the very reduced normal flu death since masking was implemented

        The article doesn't say they did. It really sounds like they looked at the expected number of deaths, the actual number of deaths, and the number of deaths blamed on coronavirus ... and then went into "what if" land.

        There have been other studies that found rather large undercounts, so I'm sure there is something to them. I have also heard (a lot) about dying with COVID-19 versus dying of COVID-19 but other than a few oft-repeated anecdotes, I haven't seen anything where serious research has shown this.
        In conversation Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 20:28:17 EDT from nu.federati.net permalink
    2. lnxw48a1 (lnxw48a1@nu.federati.net)'s status on Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 20:13:22 EDT lnxw48a1 lnxw48a1
      in reply to
      https://nu.federati.net/url/283034

      Corrected link.
      In conversation Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 20:13:22 EDT from nu.federati.net permalink
      1. lnxw48a1 (lnxw48a1@nu.federati.net)'s status on Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 20:46:18 EDT lnxw48a1 lnxw48a1
        in reply to
        Make that "incorrected link" ... this one is really correct: https://nu.federati.net/url/283038 [www scientificamerican com]
        In conversation Sunday, 26-Sep-2021 20:46:18 EDT from nu.federati.net permalink

        Attachments

        1. Invalid filename.
          The Pandemic’s Hidden Toll Is Revealed in Excess Death Counts
          from Scientific American
          Many of the unexpected deaths in rural U.S. counties last year were not recorded as caused by COVID
  • Help
  • About
  • FAQ
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • Source
  • Version
  • Contact

Jonkman Microblog is a social network, courtesy of SOBAC Microcomputer Services. It runs on GNU social, version 1.2.0-beta5, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 All Jonkman Microblog content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.

Switch to desktop site layout.