Coronavirus Coronavirus: In-Iowa General Discussion (Not Limited)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cyclonepride

Thought Police
Staff member
Apr 11, 2006
98,751
62,248
113
54
A pineapple under the sea
www.oldschoolradical.com
Good news from LA County that seems to verify (or start to) the Santa Clara and Massachusetts testing:

http://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/phcommon/public/media/mediapubhpdetail.cfm?prid=2328

Based on results of the first round of testing, the research team estimates that approximately 4.1% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus. Adjusting this estimate for statistical margin of error implies about 2.8% to 5.6% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus- which translates to approximately 221,000 to 442,000 adults in the county who have had the infection. That estimate is 28 to 55 times higher than the 7,994 confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported to the county by the time of the study in early April. The number of COVID-related deaths in the county has now "surpassed 600."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc and psychlone99

CycloneVet

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2011
9,900
11,709
113
Cedar Falls
Had to make a Home Depot run today, in and out to grab some stain killing primer. I was the only person I saw wearing a mask and had to practically rub shoulders with half a dozen employees just standing in the way in from of the checkouts. Just standing there bullshitting. JFC at least stand back out of the ******* way. Same thing when I was walking down the isle, had trouble keeping distance from the employees who were just milling around everywhere. Worse I had to use a hand-scanner. Was kinda hoping they had a built-in scanner but nope.

Damn, sounds like I would have actually gotten some help if I would have went in there. Sorry I missed it.
 

Acylum

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2006
14,284
14,964
113
You are acting like killing 0.1% or 0.2% of 60%-80% is a small number. It's not. mortality rates of infection (not diagnosis) that high for a virus that reaches "herd" status is almost unheard of.
At the risk of you banning me again, mortality rates are not based on the percentage infected. If I may be so bold as to state facts.
 

cyclonestate

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2009
2,227
1,096
113
Good news from LA County that seems to verify (or start to) the Santa Clara and Massachusetts testing:

http://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/phcommon/public/media/mediapubhpdetail.cfm?prid=2328

Based on results of the first round of testing, the research team estimates that approximately 4.1% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus. Adjusting this estimate for statistical margin of error implies about 2.8% to 5.6% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus- which translates to approximately 221,000 to 442,000 adults in the county who have had the infection. That estimate is 28 to 55 times higher than the 7,994 confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported to the county by the time of the study in early April. The number of COVID-related deaths in the county has now "surpassed 600."

To me, the good news from these studies is the mortality rate is once again found to be in the neighborhood of the flu. The bad news is that even though the spread of the virus is 50 times greater than the number of cases officially reported, only about 5% of the total population has had it, so we have a LONG way to go.

I have no problem with our country's decision to shut things down initially. However, the cost of throwing 22 million people out of work and triggering an enormous recession (maybe depression) is something our country cannot sustain, so I think it won't be long before persons who aren't in the high risk categories will be allowed to return to work.
 

bawbie

Moderator
Staff member
Mar 17, 2006
54,336
46,966
113
Cedar Rapids, IA
To me, the good news from these studies is the mortality rate is once again found to be in the neighborhood of the flu. The bad news is that even though the spread of the virus is 50 times greater than the number of cases officially reported, only about 5% of the total population has had it, so we have a LONG way to go.

I have no problem with our country's decision to shut things down initially. However, the cost of throwing 22 million people out of work and triggering an enormous recession (maybe depression) is something our country cannot sustain, so I think it won't be long before persons who aren't in the high risk categories will be allowed to return to work.

The comparison to the flu is not accurate. The flu mortality rate is calculated based on diagnosed cases, not serology testing for antibodies. And the flu deaths include those who doctors assess died of the flu without being tested, rather than only counting the confirmed cases like Covid.
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
12,932
20,821
113
At the risk of you banning me again, mortality rates are not based on the percentage infected. If I may be so bold as to state facts.

I think that's the point. People are looking at the antibody studies and extrapolating that to the population to try to calculate a mortality rate, then comparing it to flu, etc.

If we did the same for the flu the mortality rate would be minuscule.
 

SEIOWA CLONE

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2018
6,793
6,989
113
63
Think it is safe to say all packing plants have been infected at this point.

My best friend worked in a packing plant for years, we were talking Saturday night, and he said in a packing plant, the workers on the floor are literally shoulder to shoulder, it would be impossible for them to stay 6 feet apart and do their job.
If one person has it, the virus will quickly spread through out the plant in his opinion.
 
Last edited:

Clone83

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2006
5,072
1,074
113
The comparison to the flu is not accurate. The flu mortality rate is calculated based on diagnosed cases, not serology testing for antibodies. And the flu deaths include those who doctors assess died of the flu without being tested, rather than only counting the confirmed cases like Covid.
Where is a link to support your conclusion?

In the first place, it seems many confuse what appear to be terms of art, “mortality rate” versus “case fatality rate” (see Wikipedia). This is probably somewhat common in news articles. In the second, from the CDC, it seems to me they come up with an estimate for the total number of flu cases that accounts for those who don’t seek treatment. To me it seems more likely the “case fatality rate” is an estimate using the amount calculated below as the denominator:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/how-cdc-estimates.htm

How CDC estimates Influenza Illness in the U.S.
What methods are used to estimate the number of influenza illnesses and medical visits in the U.S.?
The numbers of influenza illnesses were estimated from hospitalizations based on how many illnesses there are for every hospitalization, which was measured previously (5).

Some people with influenza will seek medical care, while others will not. CDC estimates the number of people who sought medical care for influenza using data from the 2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey, which asked people whether they did or did not seek medical care for an influenza-like illness in the prior influenza season (6).

Does anyone here have better information on how the CFR for the flu is calculated?
 
Last edited:

Clone83

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2006
5,072
1,074
113
Here is another little distinction in Wikipedia under “case fatality rate”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_fatality_rate

The term infection fatality rate (IFR) also applies to infectious disease outbreaks, and represents the proportion of deaths among all the infected individuals. It is closely related to the CFR, but attempts to additionally account for all asymptomatic and undiagnosed infections.[7] The IFR differs from the CFR in that it aims to estimate the fatality rate in all those with infection: the detected disease (cases) and those with an undetected disease (asymptomatic and not tested group).[8] (Individuals who are infected, but always remain asymptomatic, are said to have "inapparent" — or silent, or subclinical — infections.) The IFR will always be lower than the CFR as long as all deaths are accurately attributed to either the infected or the non-infected class.
 

Acylum

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2006
14,284
14,964
113
I think that's the point. People are looking at the antibody studies and extrapolating that to the population to try to calculate a mortality rate, then comparing it to flu, etc.

If we did the same for the flu the mortality rate would be minuscule.
As would the mortality rate for COVID 19.
 

jkbuff98

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2017
2,880
4,054
113
Reports coming out about the Eagle Grove Prestage plant. Not a lot of positive tests so far but a more interesting piece. Also coincides with the worthington report. Several of the tested employees in Eagle Grove are from Blawk hawk county. I know when I said that Linn county could have a bump from the blawk hawk one, that people said that it was not so. So.....today i learned that Waterloo is with in 20-30 miles of Eagle Grove and Worthington, MN is that far from Sioux Falls South Dakota.

When I said the work force of a packing plant is different than people would understand unless they have dealt with it, I meant it. Prestage is 96 miles from waterloo and Worthington is 63 miles from Sioux Falls. Don't assume that the county that the packing plant is located is where the nearly all the employees come from. This is a different culture.
My friends cousin said some of the workers in the Tama plant are from CR also a story on KGAN today reporting on lawmakers filing an OSHA complaint against Tyson in Waterloo included statements from two workers from CR . Have to wonder how many of the Linn County spike in numbers are from the plants or their family members , pretty big increase in children this past week
 

jkbuff98

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2017
2,880
4,054
113
The comparison to the flu is not accurate. The flu mortality rate is calculated based on diagnosed cases, not serology testing for antibodies. And the flu deaths include those who doctors assess died of the flu without being tested, rather than only counting the confirmed cases like Covid.
NY added suspected case deaths that’s why the US deaths one day were over 6000. Also saw a Minnesota doctor complaining about the CDC direction to classify deaths as Covid even if the main cause of death was heart disease -
 

Clone83

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2006
5,072
1,074
113
that makes sense, and shows how talking about mortality rate in the generic sense is inaccurate and misleading. What is the typical IFR and CFR for the common flu?
That’s what I asked you. Where is your link to support your conclusion?

How is it calculated?
 

cyclonestate

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2009
2,227
1,096
113
The comparison to the flu is not accurate. The flu mortality rate is calculated based on diagnosed cases, not serology testing for antibodies. And the flu deaths include those who doctors assess died of the flu without being tested, rather than only counting the confirmed cases like Covid.

While it's true that the mortality rate for flu is not based on serology testing, the point is that scientists estimate roughly 1 in a thousand flu victims dies from the virus, and scientists also estimate roughly the same proportion of CIVID-19 victims die from that virus. I trust the science.
 

Halincandenza

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2018
9,434
10,262
113
To me, the good news from these studies is the mortality rate is once again found to be in the neighborhood of the flu. The bad news is that even though the spread of the virus is 50 times greater than the number of cases officially reported, only about 5% of the total population has had it, so we have a LONG way to go.

I have no problem with our country's decision to shut things down initially. However, the cost of throwing 22 million people out of work and triggering an enormous recession (maybe depression) is something our country cannot sustain, so I think it won't be long before persons who aren't in the high risk categories will be allowed to return to work.
Yeah not really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bawbie

agrabes

Well-Known Member
Oct 25, 2006
1,686
510
113
I assume to stop protests or something?

Per the article, they will be used to organize testing and perform contact tracing of infected employees. Like she's done already Reynolds seems to be strategically using National Guard soldiers as sort of a "rapid response" work force for general labor. She's already activated troops a few times to do certain tasks like delivering medical supplies, etc.

While not great that we have these outbreaks, she does seem to be attempting to contain them. Though it's probably a bit late at this point considering the number of infected in these plants.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.