4 ms·

> Absolutely not. The scientific approach is to look at the new disease and see how it compares to other similar RTIs. I think the the scientific approach is t

> Absolutely not. The scientific approach is to look at the new disease and see how it compares to other similar RTIs. I think the the scientific approach is to use the best data you have at a given time and update your understanding as you get new data. You make a lot of big claims that contradict multiple specific studies with published results. It's clear you hope that the epidemic is over (as we all do). But hope isn't enough. To quote Derek Lowe [1], a scientist working in drug discovery: "Everyone will have seen the various population surveys with antibody testing that have suggested, in most cases, that a rather small percentage of people have been exposed. Think of the various ways you could get such a result: (1) it’s just what it looks like, and most people are unprotected because they have so far been unexposed. (2) the antibody results are what they look like – low exposure – but people’s T-cell responses mean that there are actually more people protected than we realize. (3) the antibody results are deceiving, because the antibody response fades over time, meaning that more people have been exposed than it looks like. (3a) the antibody response fades, but the T-cell response is still protective (3b) the antibody response fades and so does the T-cell response. That last one is not a happy possibility." So we essentially have 4 plausible scenarios that explain our best study results. We all hope it's (2) or (3a). But I wouldn't say that we have a lot of actual evidence to prove that yet. [1] https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/06/22/thoughts-on-antibody-persistence-and-the-pandemic https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/06/22/th...

gizmo 6y ago
Scientific consensus takes years to form, so any claim I make will be contradicted by some scientific findings and affirmed by others. What I outlined in the part you quoted is the null hypothesis: that this new coronavirus behaves like the other coronaviruses we are familiar with. That may of course turn out to be false, but it's indisputably the correct starting point for any serious analysis. My objection was that many early predictions disregarded this null hypothesis and only looked at preliminary data thereby discarding everything we've learned about RTIs in the past 200 years. That's how you end up with predictions that are off by 1000x or more. That is a huge blunder, and really inexcusable. You say we don't have a lot of actual evidence yet, but I think we do. For instance we see that Sweden that didn't lock down has practically indistinguishable All Cause Deaths outcomes as the neighboring Nordics[1]. Many predicted that Sweden would have catastrophically worse outcomes but it hasn't. How is that possible when clearly the virus is spreading freely in Sweden but the outcome isn't any worse? Locking down a country 5 months into the Flu season is completely pointless because by that point too large a percentage of the population is infected already, so you wouldn't expect that to make any kind of meaningful difference. And that's consistent with the data. In the VS abnormal deaths were at a 6-year high in November[2]! The notion that Covid19 was contained for --months-- in China is an absurdity, given how much we travel by air. Antibodies were also found in sewage from December all over Europe, which proves beyond a doubt that virus spread without us even realizing it for months! If I had more time I could give you countless more sources, but the evidence clearly points in one direction: New coronavirus just like other known coronaviruses. [1] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZlnYQCU0AA0jkv?format=png&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZlnYQCU0AA0jkv?format=png&name=... [2] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZNQ9arUEAAS9W9?format=png&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZNQ9arUEAAS9W9?format=png&name=...
- lolc 6y ago
  I'm all for discussing how to best deal with the virus and which measures best contain the spread. Sweden is an interesting experiment. But your sources are lo-fi. I was unable to read the second picture. Check out https://euromomo.eu https://euromomo.eu for a good source. > For instance we see that Sweden that didn't lock down has practically indistinguishable All Cause Deaths outcomes as the neighboring Nordics[1]. Sweden had very high excess mortality compared to its neighbors and is still showing abnormally high. For Norway and Finland the numbers remained flat. Your plot sums up the entire winter and stops at week 18! It's decidedly not fine-grained enough to judge lock-down effects. > New coronavirus just like other known coronaviruses. Even for younger people we haven't seen a peak in deaths like that in a while. Looking at Euromomo the age bracket 15-44 years saw a 15% increase in deaths during a whole month. An unprecedented increase in the last five years. We don't know how much worse the numbers would be without lock-down. And it's not over yet. Please don't say that the virus is "just like other coronaviruses". Most of them are benign and not even tracked that much. So we know little about them. SARS-Cov2 can well be compared to SARS-Cov which is extinct. Luckily.
  - gizmo 6y ago
    If you're just going to ignore the charts I posted what's the point? I already provided you with a chart that shows that, in fact, Sweden does not have exceptional all cause mortality. Not compared to its neighbors and not compared to previous years in Sweden. Yes, the chart is a month old, but if nothing exceptional is going on by May and covid deaths have steadily declined since[1] there really isn't a story here. Euromomo data is preprocessed data and not suitable for analysis. Get the raw all cause mortality statistics (by age group if possible) directly from each country health agency, and use that instead. [1] https://adamaltmejd.se/covid/ https://adamaltmejd.se/covid/
    - lolc 6y ago
      Of course I'm ignoring your charts! After explaining that the first of your charts is too broad, and the other I can't read the labels of. I was giving you the benefit of doubt but after your answer I must presume you're picky with your sources to protect your story. I'm not aware of a flaw in the Euromomo collection. Why discount it? I think they're more competent at collecting death-tolls than I am. What would be the benefit of me collecting the numbers myself? Do you disagree with my estimate of 15% excess mortality in the 15-44 age-bracket? Or do you know of a Coronavirus epidemic in the past that had a comparable effect?
GoodJokes 6y ago
Not many people are getting antibody tests and they are VERY unreliable when using for extrapolation due to yup, parent commenters well put point about the hot spottiness of this virus. So far the pandemic, in my life, has been a neurotic people power play. I can't go 10 minutes in my day without someone commenting on seeing someone without a mask or walking too close to them. I am wearing my mask as advised, but that people thing its ok to chastise others for not, is wild to me. R is below 1 in my county, and yesterday our governor decided to make not wearing a mask a misdemeanor offense with jail time. That is insane especially in this justice system environment.

gizmo 6y ago

Scientific consensus takes years to form, so any claim I make will be contradicted by some scientific findings and affirmed by others. What I outlined in the part you quoted is the null hypothesis: that this new coronavirus behaves like the other coronaviruses we are familiar with. That may of course turn out to be false, but it's indisputably the correct starting point for any serious analysis. My objection was that many early predictions disregarded this null hypothesis and only looked at preliminary data thereby discarding everything we've learned about RTIs in the past 200 years. That's how you end up with predictions that are off by 1000x or more. That is a huge blunder, and really inexcusable. You say we don't have a lot of actual evidence yet, but I think we do. For instance we see that Sweden that didn't lock down has practically indistinguishable All Cause Deaths outcomes as the neighboring Nordics[1]. Many predicted that Sweden would have catastrophically worse outcomes but it hasn't. How is that possible when clearly the virus is spreading freely in Sweden but the outcome isn't any worse? Locking down a country 5 months into the Flu season is completely pointless because by that point too large a percentage of the population is infected already, so you wouldn't expect that to make any kind of meaningful difference. And that's consistent with the data. In the VS abnormal deaths were at a 6-year high in November[2]! The notion that Covid19 was contained for --months-- in China is an absurdity, given how much we travel by air. Antibodies were also found in sewage from December all over Europe, which proves beyond a doubt that virus spread without us even realizing it for months! If I had more time I could give you countless more sources, but the evidence clearly points in one direction: New coronavirus just like other known coronaviruses. [1] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZlnYQCU0AA0jkv?format=png&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZlnYQCU0AA0jkv?format=png&name=... [2] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZNQ9arUEAAS9W9?format=png&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZNQ9arUEAAS9W9?format=png&name=...

lolc 6y ago
I'm all for discussing how to best deal with the virus and which measures best contain the spread. Sweden is an interesting experiment. But your sources are lo-fi. I was unable to read the second picture. Check out https://euromomo.eu https://euromomo.eu for a good source. > For instance we see that Sweden that didn't lock down has practically indistinguishable All Cause Deaths outcomes as the neighboring Nordics[1]. Sweden had very high excess mortality compared to its neighbors and is still showing abnormally high. For Norway and Finland the numbers remained flat. Your plot sums up the entire winter and stops at week 18! It's decidedly not fine-grained enough to judge lock-down effects. > New coronavirus just like other known coronaviruses. Even for younger people we haven't seen a peak in deaths like that in a while. Looking at Euromomo the age bracket 15-44 years saw a 15% increase in deaths during a whole month. An unprecedented increase in the last five years. We don't know how much worse the numbers would be without lock-down. And it's not over yet. Please don't say that the virus is "just like other coronaviruses". Most of them are benign and not even tracked that much. So we know little about them. SARS-Cov2 can well be compared to SARS-Cov which is extinct. Luckily.
- gizmo 6y ago
  If you're just going to ignore the charts I posted what's the point? I already provided you with a chart that shows that, in fact, Sweden does not have exceptional all cause mortality. Not compared to its neighbors and not compared to previous years in Sweden. Yes, the chart is a month old, but if nothing exceptional is going on by May and covid deaths have steadily declined since[1] there really isn't a story here. Euromomo data is preprocessed data and not suitable for analysis. Get the raw all cause mortality statistics (by age group if possible) directly from each country health agency, and use that instead. [1] https://adamaltmejd.se/covid/ https://adamaltmejd.se/covid/
  - lolc 6y ago
    Of course I'm ignoring your charts! After explaining that the first of your charts is too broad, and the other I can't read the labels of. I was giving you the benefit of doubt but after your answer I must presume you're picky with your sources to protect your story. I'm not aware of a flaw in the Euromomo collection. Why discount it? I think they're more competent at collecting death-tolls than I am. What would be the benefit of me collecting the numbers myself? Do you disagree with my estimate of 15% excess mortality in the 15-44 age-bracket? Or do you know of a Coronavirus epidemic in the past that had a comparable effect?

GoodJokes 6y ago

Not many people are getting antibody tests and they are VERY unreliable when using for extrapolation due to yup, parent commenters well put point about the hot spottiness of this virus. So far the pandemic, in my life, has been a neurotic people power play. I can't go 10 minutes in my day without someone commenting on seeing someone without a mask or walking too close to them. I am wearing my mask as advised, but that people thing its ok to chastise others for not, is wild to me. R is below 1 in my county, and yesterday our governor decided to make not wearing a mask a misdemeanor offense with jail time. That is insane especially in this justice system environment.