Comparing flu vs CV19 deaths - apples to oranges
 

I haven't seen this and couldn't find it in a search.

This is interesting. I added the bold to the text below.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/

So what is the point of this??? Dead is dead...

People do not die from CV19...they get complications like Pneumonia and kick off for that dirt nap in the bone orchard.

It seems that CV uses the body's immune system to exacerbate already existing conditions. The Immune system says hey something is wrong here...and starts to go after whatever already exists thinking it is the cause of the maledy.. it has never seen CV before so it misses it completely..going for the known quantity.

Everything has a process or mechanism..you just have to figure it out..

Because there are idiots that compare it to auto accidents and heart attacks.

Comparing flu vs CV19 deaths - apples to oranges
 

This chart shows total deaths (all causes) in NJ for the month of April over the last 6 years.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...ed1a42a4e3.jpg

Sorry. You people who claim the lock down was not necessary, I simply disagree.

I can't get 2019 or 2020 data, but the prior years April numbers are close, if not the same, as my CDC database. Those numbers are composed of all deaths other than terrorist acts. Death by tsunamis, earthquakes, and volcano would be included.

2018 - 6181
2017 - 6283
2016 - 6080
2015 - 5975

Because there are people saying "this is no big deal. We should just be going about our business as if nothing were happening. Look, this is kills far fewer people than the flu, and we don't do anything special for the flu every year."

It think it requires a closer look. We’re 4 months in and know a lot more than we did in February. Certain areas aren’t ready, other places weren’t severely impacted.

I think we need to get those lightly impacted areas back to work now so that if this does circle back on us in the fall, we’re as financially stable as we can be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, with a thorough understanding of the virus and the way it works, and a comprehensive understanding of geographic demographics, and the time to plan by demographics, then yes, it probably should have been done differently.

Unfortunately, 1 We didn't know much about how the Virus actually works and 2 We didn't have a ton of time to try to plan based on population density, culture, environment, etc....

Maybe in the aftermath, we should get the various govt agencies from fed to local to spend a bunch of time figuring out the demographics, pop density, culture, etc... and then design area specific measures for future pandemics and/or emergencies.

But in an unexpected, poorly understood emergency, I'm not sure expecting a super granular reaction is realistic.

I do agree with you and hope that "we" will learn from this and if something like this happens again, will have a better reaction.

Totally agree. If the re-opening is dragged out, there may be dire options if some parts of the country are hit a second time. Furthermore, all of the stats point to not just differing rates of spread, that is old news, but differing rates of fatalities. Time to calibrate and re-set.

The shelter in place orders were a catch-all to buy time. If anyone thinks the shelter in place order will PREVENT YOU FROM EXPOSURE, then I'm sorry you are wrong.

There were at least two groups or task forces doing exactly what you describe, (preparing for the next pandemic), that were disbanded under the current administration.

But to your other point, you are absolutely correct. I’ve never known anyone who has died from the flu in my life and no one I know does. Hospitals have never been overwhelmed w flu patients. China has never had to build a massive hospital in one week for flu patients.

All you have to do is count the excessive or excess deaths in NYC last month to any other April ever and there is your answer. The flu happens every year, it’s a human virus that has been around for hundreds of years that our bodies have a built-up, natural immunity to. No comparison whatsoever to Covid-19.

Doesn't matter if it was "necessary" or not (by whatever standard), it is unconstitutional.

What's your suggestion for what should have been done?

What about claiming that the lock down wasn't done any better than Sweden? More costly, for sure, but when other vectors exist...

Plenty of countries had lock downs AND MUCH worse death rates than Sweden.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1588393631.JPG

So... how is that possible?

Ten million pop that does as told with a high percentqge that live alone.

Death per million currently 40% higher than the US. 7rh highest deaths per million in world (excluding 3 teeny tiny countries.

Why is "high population density" Gallup, NM blowing up? A 1000 cases within a 70,000 population. 19 deaths in April when they usually have a total of 48 deaths for all reasons in the month

Do you actually think the Swedish model should be used in much of the US?

The link to the article about Gallup, NM is no worky.

When you have a hub in the middle of nowhere, obviously people congregate there from a larger area.

The question is not so much whether the shelter in place should have been ordered, but rather should it be lifted, modified, or kept entirely as is.

NM... weird.

France implemented some hard shut down measure. They got hit hard.

Ireland. Is that a chart popping population density? They are doing about the same as Sweden.
Anyway, the numbers are there.

The bigger player is more likely who lands - seems like certain locations got virus carpet bombs.

Age is of course a huge factor. I'm going to guess that Ethiopia doesn't have stellar social distancing programs in place. But they also likely don't have a lot of people over 50.

Point is, the social distancing(which has been shoved down our media throats) doesn't explain the huge disparities in death rate.

We still don't have a clear picture on when people got infection - only that a whole lot of people have had this and didn't know.

It's tough to correlate shutdown efforts to infections, when we don't know that timing.

One last thought; if our shut down is so damn good, and this thing has a 2 week gestation... then how is it, that months latter, this virus is not extinct?

Is our shut down so good because it's so expensive?

Is it so effective because the group-think has the concept-reinforcing propaganda ad's? People do like to sound smart, once they have a concept drilled into their collective heads. ---so weird how, for many, there is but one variable (how hard you stay home).

I dunno USA - why not look at Canada as your control to how well you're handling this thing?

I mean Canada and US are on the same page in so many ways, they are right next door and share the same breathable airspace and share the same potbellied truck drivers sharing the same truck stop hookers (sarcasm that).

Covid stats Canada - 55,000 cases 3,300 deaths.

Covid stats US - 1,131,492 cases 65,000 deaths.

Canada population vs USA? 37 million vs 328 million.

Canada has been very inconsistent from province to province (based on the politics of the local regime) but has generally been much more aggressive than the US in implementing societal controls.

I think that's the thing that scares me the most - our personal well being has never been more in the hands of our government since the dawn of the first modernity.

Apples and oranges Purry. As you stated yourself. 8.5 million people in NY city. Then pile on similar density in Chicago, LA, Houston and the list goes on. Sorry, the great white north is no basis for comparison.

Thanks Steve. That was interesting. I was not aware the CDC flu numbers were just estimates.

US : Canada doesn't seem like a very good comparison since we've got nearly 10:1 population in a smaller area. A better comparison of cases and deaths is going to be by population or by population density.

Canada cases and deaths per million 1459 and 90
US cases and deaths per million 3420 and 199

A better comparison might be a state that's got a similar population density to Canada (4/sqmi per wikipedia)
The two closest states are Wyoming at 6/sqmi and Alaska at 1.26/sqmi.

Wyoming cases and deaths per million 973 and 12
Alaska cases and deaths per million 493 and 12

Comparing something to all of Canada where most of the place is empty isn't a great comparison either, so maybe a comparison of just Quebec to someplace.

Quebec has a population density of 15.5/sqmi

Texas has a population density of 108/sqmi
Nevada has a population density of 27/sqmi
Idaho has a population density of 20/sqmi

Quebec cases and deaths per million 3510 and 248
Texas cases and deaths per million 1072 and 30
Nevada cases and deaths per million 1788 and 87
Idaho cases and deaths per million 1206 and 37

Looking at the data that way, Canada isn't doing so hot.

I really enjoy Canada. People are all very nice and I especially like Vancouver. I like Alberta and Edmonton.

How about looking at ALL the data? sheesh, You cherry pickers.

The spread of death rates... the velocity.. The concentrations in each country with hot-spots... The demographics...

There is SOOO MUCH info there and everyone is bouncing about cherry picking this country vs that and demanding that social distancing (pop density) is the only variable. CLEARLY it is not.

It is also clearly not the biggest factor.

I'm going to agree w you that population density is not the only variable, that's very clear. Los Angeles and other CA. cities have a fraction of the case and death rate of NYC and a lot lower numbers than I was expecting, frankly. I do not attribute NY's bad numbers only to their density, I think that they did not lock down in time plus some other really unfortunate factors that led to the perfect storm.

There are so many variables involved...no one has a clue yet imo. Certainly no one on this board does...

It's certainly not the only variable, but when you're talking about person to person transmission, it's kind of a big one. You also can't really compare NYC and LA since NYC has nearly double the population and over 3x the population density. And I haven't lived in LA, but I've driven through it. It seemed like there wasn't a ton of public transport whereas NYC has heavily utilized public transport. I work for an enormous bank and most of the folks that I work with are in NY and NJ and all of them use public transport daily (when they aren't working from home.)

From https://versus.com/en/los-angeles-vs-new-york
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1588436784.JPG
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1588436784.JPG

Then if you think about the use of public transportation like buses, subways (and even taxis where you have tons of folks sitting the backs of the same cars all day). It seems like there may be a small edge to NY in that area as well.
NYC subway and bus util per mta.info | Facts and Figures
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1588437589.JPG
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1588437589.JPG
LA bus and rail combined per Metro Ridership
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1588438287.JPG


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1588437589.png

Steve, absolutely you are correct in pointing out the difference in overall density and public transport use in NYC as factors. The only thing I would challenge is that the way they measure population in NYC, (all 5 boroughs spread out over an enormous land area), makes using Los Angeles county as the true comparison. It is the real metropolitan area of Los Angeles, plus a lot of unpopulated rural areas. There are cities within the city of Los Angeles that are not part of the city of L.A. Long Beach, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, etc.

The true population of L.A. is LA county @ 10 million, making it a bigger city than NYC if it was counted the same way.

Mexico city. Most densely populated city. They must have crazy high CV death, if population density is the main factor.

Do they?

Well said but, using population densities that way is a misdirection.

I don't know, something like 90% of Canada's population lives within 100km of the Canada/US border. Bringing in statistical machinations (provincial or national densities) that incorporate vast areas of nearly unpopulated space in Canada's north is not meaningful.

I see that you've attempted to compensate by focusing on Quebec but that's not a solution - take a look at a map, Quebec is primarily a vast wilderness.

For a better example, let's look at the City of Vancouver.

Using wiki data:

Density is over 8,600 per sq mile in Vancouver with a metro population of 2.5 million.

Density in New York is 26,000 sq/mi with a metro population of 8.5 million.

Vancouver has had a TOTAL of 823 positive Covid-19 cases within the entire Vancouver Coastal Health region, an area which is broader than the Vancouver metro area.

Those numbers are of interest compared to New York city, no?

file a lawsuit

you'll quickly find out how stupid your claim is

One thing I would like to have more details on - are how many of the deaths occurring are due to people not seeking medical care, or unable to get treatments for non-COVID related illnesses?

Their cases and deaths have not begun to level off.

April 29th

https://www.theyucatantimes.com/2020/04/mexico-city-private-hospitals-at-full-capacity/


At least five of Mexico City’s largest private hospitals have filled up with coronavirus patients and have no room for new ones, doctors and hospital workers said on Tuesday, though more than 100 other medical centers have available beds.

The ABC medical center, Medica Sur, Hospital Español and two of the Angeles group of hospitals were no longer receiving patients with COVID-19, the disease transmitted by the novel coronavirus.

“Currently, we have no available beds,” said a worker at ABC, adding that availability of the 150 beds for coronavirus patients is “variable”.

The situation was similar at Medica Sur, Hospital Español and the two Angeles hospitals, according to doctors and workers contacted by Reuters and who asked not to be identified because they are not authorized to speak on the record.

A doctor at ABC said 37 of the medical center’s 40 respirators were being used.

The National Association of Private Hospitals said there are 1,052 beds and 363 intensive care units with respirators across 100 Mexican medical centers to treat coronavirus patients.

The association’s president, Mario Gonzalez, said demand for beds is increasingly rapidly as the virus spreads in Mexico City.

Mexico has confirmed 16,752 coronavirus cases and 1,569 deaths, with the capital accounting for 4,400 of the cases and 348 of the deaths, the most of anywhere in the country.

The government has said the real number of infected people is significantly higher than the tally of confirmed cases.

Overall, Mexico City still had 42% of its general hospital beds available and 67% of beds with respirators, the Mexican government’s head of epidemiology, Jose Luis Alomia, told a news conference late on Tuesday.

“The National Health System still has beds available to be able to attend these type of patients,” said Alomia. “But, as the cases increase … we may see a decrease in the availability of beds.”

Another thing to take into account is time. Different locations are at different points in the timeline for the local pandemic.

Mexico. I do not know the numbers for them. But, what numbers are out there, how accurate are they? I also would not be surprised if weather/temp/sunlight does have an affect on how the local pandemic plays out in the long term. How much, well that is one of many questions.

I do think that NYC messed up early on and did not encourage social distancing soon enough.

It is going to be years before this is ever figured out, if ever.


Edit: I was typing as Sooner or later was posting, (good info)

Mexico has done very little testing. 707 /million vs 20,765/million in the US.

I read someplace yesterday, that in NYC in early February, they had a large increase in the number of heart attacks, like five fold. But now, they are having a reduction in the expected heart attack cases, running 60% +/- of normal. The article speculated that perhaps these people are simply not going to the hospitals for fear of exposure to the coronavirus. I wonder if some of the missing cases are either being classified as corona cases, or people are getting the virus because of their heart conditions.

the virus is causing some vascular issues

not surprising since it uses the ACE2 "entry point" into the cell - ACE2 is a major 'factor' in regulating blood pressure, so is common in the lungs & vascular system

ACE2 is a little dingus that sticks out on the surface of the cell - lots of 'em

'things' fit it like a lock & key *at very small scale - electrostatic not mechanical fit); on of those 'things' is this virus

"Mexico has confirmed 16,752 coronavirus cases and 1,569 deaths,

That's a lot less death than NYC, right?

And that 1,569 is not Mexico city, but all of Mexico.

So they have the China Virus, they have more people in a more dense urban area... and yet their death count is not nearly as high.

And we keep on getting the drum-beat message that "staying home" (perhaps for years) is the only answer.

Who believes that anymore?

^^^^ No reasonable person has ever suggested or believed that imo. I think NYC is probably unique...and no one can deny what ocurred there....but why? A few factors...several major airports bringing in the International travelers, then everybody hops on trains, subways, etc., local housing density like nowhere else I know, long delay before virus is even detected, ....

The models have always been suspect....GIGO from the git-go....

Everyone was "winging it" from day 1 (which was actually day ?)....and still are.

WAGs and SWAGs...but what other option was there....back then...even now imo.

Hindsight...isn't 20-20 either....not even close sometimes.

Balance...