Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Pass me a Corona! II

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

The comments to the original Pass me a Corona! post are closed. Additional comments on that topic should be posted below. I will start this post with PaV’s last comments to the prior post [i.e., everything that follows is PaV, not Barry].

Today the paywall for a Spectator USA article has been lifted. The article is by a retired pathologist who worked as a pathologist for the NHS in the UK, Dr. John Lee. I mentioned his article yesterday.

Every point he makes parallels arguments I’ve made here, though not so much the time period of death–though this, too, parallels a concern over “excess deaths.”

Here are some relevant comments:

The distinction between dying ‘with’ COVID-19 and dying ‘due to’ COVID-19 is not just splitting hairs. Consider some examples: an 87-year-old woman with dementia in a nursing home; a 79-year-old man with metastatic bladder cancer; a 29-year-old man with leukemia treated with chemotherapy; a 46-year-old woman with motor neurone disease for two years. All develop chest infections and die. All test positive for COVID-19. Yet all were vulnerable to death by chest infection from any infective cause (including the flu). COVID-19 might have been the final straw, but it has not caused their deaths.

Here’s a comment that might well be directed at the deaths we see coming out of Italy and Spain. Are these deaths due to a variety of causes but simply attributed, blindly, to the SARS-CoV-2 virus?

Next, what about the deaths? Many UK health spokespersons have been careful to repeatedly say that the numbers quoted in the UK indicate death with the virus, not death due to the virus — this matters. When giving evidence in parliament a few days ago, Prof. Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London said that he now expects fewer than 20,000 COVID-19 deaths in the UK but, importantly, two-thirds of these people would have died anyway. In other words, he suggests that the crude figure for ‘COVID deaths’ is three times higher than the number who have actually been killed by COVID-19. (Even the two-thirds figure is an estimate — it would not surprise me if the real proportion is higher.)

If we take Ferguson literally, does this mean that the actual number of deaths worldwide due to SARS-CoV-2 is not 35,000, but around 12,000? Will we ever know? The people responsible for finding this out are the same people who might have been gigantically wrong about their numbers. What would be their motivation to prove how incompetent they were?

It should be noted that there is no international standard method for attributing or recording causes of death. Also, normally, most respiratory deaths never have a specific infective cause recorded, whereas at the moment we can expect all positive COVID-19 results associated with a death to be recorded. Again, this is not splitting hairs. Imagine a population where more and more of us have already had COVID-19, and where every ill and dying patient is tested for the virus. The deaths apparently due to COVID-19, the COVID trajectory, will approach the overall death rate. It would appear that all deaths were caused by COVID-19 — would this be true? No. The severity of the epidemic would be indicated by how many extra deaths (above normal) there were overall.

Let me point out that this very problem is what has been going on now for over thirty years in the case of HIV. This is exactly how HIV/AIDS is defined. And Dr. John Lee says this is wrong. He’s a pathologist. So, Dr. Fauci, in charge of HIV/AIDS for over thirty years has been employing a definition for HIV/AIDS that is wrong, not true. Is it any wonder, then, that we are in this quandry?

Today, Fauci is quoted as saying that the number of deaths he expects from CoVid-19 is between 100,000 and 200,000. No way that is going to happen. Are the blind leading the blind?

Here’s a fresh perspective on numbers:

Let me finish with a couple of examples. Colleagues in Germany feel sure that their numbers are nearer the truth than most, because they had plenty of testing capacity ready when the pandemic struck. Currently the death rate is 0.8 percent in Germany. If we assume that about one-third of the recorded deaths are due to COVID-19 and that they have managed to test a third of all cases in the country who actually have the disease (a generous assumption), then the death rate for COVID-19 would be 0.08 percent. That might go up slightly, as a result of death lag. If we assume at present that this effect might be 25 percent (which seems generous), that would give an overall, and probably upper limit, of death rate of 0.1 percent, which is similar to seasonal flu.</blockquote. Let’s note that 0.08% is less than the mortality of seasonal flu. That’s how this entire thread started. Is the Deep State at work again?

This thread began on March 18th. Total number dead on that date: 150. Twelve days later–almost two weeks, the number is 2613. So, 2,470 people died in an almost two week period.

And how many have died of seasonal flu since Feb 28th? 4,000–as of March 19th.

We’re being had.

Comments
Wisconsin Republicans force in-person election rather than a mail in ballot. So, rather than agree with the Democrat Governor they would rather put voters at risk. https://apple.news/Aumx1mZ8YTb-dsMhj6q83VQEd George
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
07:58 PM
7
07
58
PM
PDT
Hm, looks like they came to their senses? 3M will continue to export masks to CanadadaveS
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
07:57 PM
7
07
57
PM
PDT
The virus is deadly serious to people who don't take care of themselves. Nursing homes- the people most likely don't get much sun and their serum vitamin D is very low. The winter time- northerners don't get much sun and their serum vitamin D is low. Low serum vitamin D = a compromised immune system. It is very telling that flu season is during the time of limited Sunning. There are many people who get the virus and are asymptomatic. Many others have mild symptoms. There needs to be a study on those people- their blood, genetics and supplement habits. Too bad that may never happen.ET
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
07:48 PM
7
07
48
PM
PDT
Ed George has no idea how Trump has treated our allies. Ed George is an imbecile who can't assess evidence. And yes, in 291 days President Trump will be re-elected and smart, competent people will be back in charge. Joe Biden isn't smart and he isn't competent.ET
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
07:34 PM
7
07
34
PM
PDT
JT
@EdGeorge in 291 days we will have smart, competent people back in charge.
For the sake of the world, I hope you are right.Ed George
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
06:41 PM
6
06
41
PM
PDT
TF
What does a naturalist say to someone who has lost a loved one in the pandemic:
“I’m very sorry for your loss. If you need anything, do not hesitate to call.” What do you say? “Given that he is now in heaven I am so glad that he died.”? See, I could stoop you your level of childish retorts but I prefer not to. Bye.Ed George
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
06:35 PM
6
06
35
PM
PDT
@EdGeorge in 291 days we will have smart, competent people back in charge. I hope we do okay til then.Jim Thibodeau
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
06:32 PM
6
06
32
PM
PDT
What does a naturalist say to someone who has lost a loved one in the pandemic: a) Do not worry, he/she was just a 'bag of chemicals'? b) Do not bother burying him/her, morals are illusory and epiphenomenal? c) Consciousness is an illusion, therefore your suffering is an illusion too? (Maybe while holding an fMRI scan?)Truthfreedom
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
06:26 PM
6
06
26
PM
PDT
JT
If we are extremely lucky drug treatments will make a big impact.
As long as the US doesn’t rely on a foreign supply for any of these drugs. Given the way Trump has treated its allies during this crisis, he might find it difficult to find a country willing to share any of their supply.Ed George
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
06:24 PM
6
06
24
PM
PDT
If SARS-CoV-2 is 'natural' selection, what are the containment measures then? 'Artificial' selection? Genetic drift? HGT? Magic? Hey, think, naturalist, think!Truthfreedom
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
06:18 PM
6
06
18
PM
PDT
If we are extremely lucky drug treatments will make a big impact.Jim Thibodeau
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
06:17 PM
6
06
17
PM
PDT
JT, yes, those survival rates could be horrendous. If we assume that 20% become infected, a distinct possibility, that would mean between 1.3 and 2.6 million. Are there any here that still believe that 100,000 deaths in the US is out of the question? [Edit: JT, you were obviously exercising your gozintas at the same time I was. :) ]Ed George
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
06:08 PM
6
06
08
PM
PDT
If 50% of Americans get it, a 3%mortality rate would be almost 5 million Americans dying. I’ve been trying to tell people here for a couple of weeks that this thing is serious, and it’s probably not going to kill 5 million people, but it’s still goddamn serious.Jim Thibodeau
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
06:06 PM
6
06
06
PM
PDT
ET, Let's hope the survival rate is much higher than that. The way this spreads, only 96% to 98% would be horrendousdaveS
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
05:42 PM
5
05
42
PM
PDT
One of the good things that has happened is so far the administration claims that they are going to pay for hospital bills for anybody who gets coronavirus, so we’re getting a kind of universal healthcare, at least for this one particular type of illness. As 600,000+ Americans declare bankruptcy every year from medical bills, this is a small good thing.Jim Thibodeau
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
05:18 PM
5
05
18
PM
PDT
What I hear/ read people say is that there is a 96-98% survival rate so it can't be that bad.ET
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
05:16 PM
5
05
16
PM
PDT
@rhampton I live in Florida with a disproportionate number of people who get bad info. Last week I literally had a guy sneer at me because “this is just a cold, everybody’s overreacting” but it looks like finally the good info is seeping through. My job has been deemed Essential because a small part of our VOIP network deals with a special channel that only first responders are on. So, the good thing is I’m getting 20% more money than normal, but the bad thing is I’m still at work five days a week. But a good sign is on the way home at seven tonight, the streets of this town were deserted to the point that they had the same traffic patterns as they do it like 3 AM on a normal day.Jim Thibodeau
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
05:06 PM
5
05
06
PM
PDT
I certainly argued forcefully at times when, in retrospect, I could have held off the edginess. It wasn't meant to be edgy, but simply was part of the struggle to make sense of things. The reality is that this "sheltering-in-place" has very real effects. It's a known evil, while the potential harm posed by this virus--after seeing how quickly and with few deaths both China and S. Korea ended this virus' incursion, it was at first hard to see what we were dealing with, Further, everything we were hearing came at this in a highly theoretical way--something I'm naturally skeptical of. But, we began to see the deaths in Italy rise, then in Spain. So, the anecdotal evidence that began to emerge started to make me see that this could quite possibly be an extraordinary virus we were dealing with. Then there was the battle of the models, Oxford versus Imperial College of London. And in the background was a political fear--was this virus response being manipulated. Just yesterday, with the numbers coming out of the UK, it became clear that the Oxford study had missed the mark. This got us, or, me, at least, back to the numbers for the Diamond Princess cruise ship. All of this made clear that the R_nought, which was sort of dangling in background during the Presidential press conferences, was very much a part of what we were seeing, and it was high. I worked out some numbers and I reached the conclusion that we will, in the long run not save any lives (though an effective vaccine, earlier rather than later, will indeed save lives), but that the real concern was for our medical care system in places where the virus had spread rapidly and where the populations were most susceptible. As I stated yesterday, I can now see the wisdom in what our leadership has done and the need to continue thier policies for a few weeks more. So, I'm much more at peace with where things stand. But I'm, of course, concerned with the loss of life and with the medical personnel that are charged with their care. We can certainly keep them in our prayers. Mimus, if you're looking in, I've made an attempt to have you post here again, but I'm not quite sure how to do that. Perhaps Barry or News can do that. I hope you understand that I was on a journey of understanding, wanting to know why the severe measures we now live under had been justified by the President and others. I was rather sure that there were others who felt the same way. I'm not content to just listen to "experts." I want to understand what's going on myself and in my own terms. It took a while, and now I see that while a lot of models got a lot of things wrong, there are models that seem to be getting important things right. So, I hope you understand why I just didn't accede to your thinking. The question now is: if in New York there are almost 400 people dying each day and in California, a state of about the same population, maybe more, there are only 24 deaths a day, then why the same lockdown measures? But, the better way of putting this is: what are medical professionals and scientists doing to try and figure out a way to get the numbers in New York down? IOW, is there a plan we can put into place where tracking and quarenting can be done in a more effective way? If this is done, then with an action plan in place, it's possible to start back on the road to normal life more quickly. But I don't see any indications of that. The S. Koreans had such a plan, and I don't understand why we don't. In the meantime, like everyone else, we hold on for the ride. It's going to be bumpy!PaV
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
04:00 PM
4
04
00
PM
PDT
. No answer Ed? Are you still avoiding the physical evidence? Are you also avoiding your record of comments on this blog? This is not surprising.Upright BiPed
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
11:11 AM
11
11
11
AM
PDT
@387 Upright Biped:
And while I have you on the phone … in your (demonstrated) zeal to demean religious men, did you not recently tell a 60 year-old grown Christian man on this blog that if his wife wasn’t getting it from him the way that your wife was getting it from you, then you felt sorry for his wife? Very obviously this is not a bar, and you were not back-slapping your old buddy from the factory – we can all be honest about that, right? And the grown man that you said these things to; isn’t he among those you were outright lying to when you first came here, trying to deceive them into believing you were a religious ID proponent?
Superb. :)Truthfreedom
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
08:00 AM
8
08
00
AM
PDT
.
I have reviewed much of the evidence that is purported to support the existence of Jesus and God, and have not found it very convincing.
As you know, this is an intelligent design blog, not a church. You’ve now made more than 1,000 comments here over several months, and thus far you haven't demonstrated that you've "reviewed" that evidence in any meaningful way whatsoever. To the contrary, you've demonstrated that you all but run from the evidence of design in biology, yet you continue to promote yourself here as a person with a high regard for physical evidence and reason. Humans have been collecting images of lifeless planets for decades on end, and we understand (and can mathematically model) the forces that result in what we see. Get one of those outstanding images in front of you and imagine a living thing suddenly appearing there. Do you think that living thing would have to be specified from memory in order to exist, or no? If so, just exactly what do you think the process of that specification would entail? The answer to this question is certainly no mystery from a scientific standpoint. In fact, both the empirical evidence and recorded history are quite clear on the matter. If you’ve actually deliberated these things, as you say you have (concluding no evidence of design), then tell us – how did you deal with all the well-documented evidence to the contrary? How did you come to conclude that a semantically closed multi-referent symbol system could come into being from nothing more than the forces that result in a lifeless planet? When you “reviewed” the evidence, you surely found that the mathematics we use model one cannot be used to model the other – that they indeed require complimentary (non-integrable) descriptions throughout physics and biology. What did you do with that little tidbit of information? And while I have you on the phone … in your (demonstrated) zeal to demean religious men, did you not recently tell a 60 year-old grown Christian man on this blog that if his wife wasn’t getting it from him the way that your wife was getting it from you, then you felt sorry for his wife? Very obviously this is not a bar, and you were not back-slapping your old buddy from the factory – we can all be honest about that, right? And the grown man that you said these things to; isn’t he among those you were outright lying to when you first came here, trying to deceive them into believing you were a religious ID proponent? The only reason I bring this up is because you used the notion of being personally offended as the means to avoid discussing the history and physical evidence eluded to in the previous paragraph. I find it hard to believe that a man who presumes (and speaks of) the intimate practices of his intellectual opponents (using it as fodder on a blog) would truly have such thin skin. Why don’t you just tell us how you dealt with the simultaneous physical requirements of discontinuous association, spatial orientation, and semantic closure appearing in a dynamic system? Then we would know that you’ve actually “reviewed” the evidence, and have found it “not very convincing”.Upright BiPed
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
07:31 AM
7
07
31
AM
PDT
Vivid, Thanks for the kind words.daveS
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
04:08 AM
4
04
08
AM
PDT
Vivid:
1) My starting point is where all of us start, and where many are ignorant that they start there, which is a set of unprovable assumptions, everyone has them. Everyone starts with metaphysics! I assume the reliability of mind. 2) Reason and its sister Logic is superior to experience. Logic cannot tell us what is but it can tell us what is NOT. 3) Because everything starts with metaphysics faith is not unreasonable, nor is fideism the same as faith. 4) Every worldview is a set of faith assumptions about the nature of things ie is a metaphysical belief. 5) Every worldview has difficulties. 6) To echo KF we should adopt the worldview that has the least number of difficulties.
Correct. The problem is, worldviews analysis on comparative difficulties is hardly ever integrated into our basic "K - 12" or equivalent education. In an era of intellectual turmoil and massive manipulation, that leaves us vulnerable. No prizes for guessing why business as usual balances of power leave that in place in the general community. In the churches, there is a shocking superficiality reflecting the failure of the general community. That's the context in which the "prosperity" debate has surged. Francis Schaeffer's general challenge to the Christian church is increasingly on target, a generation later. But, by and large, we are not listening. Coming back, worldviews are assessed on comparative difficulties across factual adequacy, coherence and balance of explanatory power [neither simplistic nor an ad hoc patchwork]. In that context, recognising the reality of finitely remote first plausibles (which define pour faith-points, thus worldviews] and that of self-evident first truths is pivotal. In that context, I have come more and more to see the significance of inescapable first principles and first duties of reason. (My ever-evolving 101 discussion is here on in context.) A strong result is that worldviews evaluation is on a cumulative case basis, with many converging lines of evidence. That's part of why factual adequacy and coherence are key criteria. In that context, schemes of thought and linked cultural agendas that undermine credibility of mind and core morality -- given first duties of reason -- are self-undermining. This specifically includes evolutionary materialistic scientism and its fellow travellers. That's part of why our civilisation is suicidal, yet again. I think a recognition of the warning Plato gave in The Laws Bk X, likely informed by the socially and spiritually chaotic impact of the Plague of Athens [itself reflective of the failure of Athenian Democracy], is appropriate:
Ath [in The Laws, Bk X 2,360 ya]. . . .[The avant garde philosophers and poets, c. 360 BC] say that fire and water, and earth and air [i.e the classical "material" elements of the cosmos], all exist by nature and chance, and none of them by art . . . [such that] all that is in the heaven, as well as animals and all plants, and all the seasons come from these elements, not by the action of mind, as they say, or of any God, or from art, but as I was saying, by nature and chance only [ --> that is, evolutionary materialism is ancient and would trace all things to blind chance and mechanical necessity] . . . . [Thus, they hold] that the principles of justice have no existence at all in nature, but that mankind are always disputing about them and altering them; and that the alterations which are made by art and by law have no basis in nature, but are of authority for the moment and at the time at which they are made.-
[ --> Relativism, too, is not new; complete with its radical amorality rooted in a worldview that has no foundational IS that can ground OUGHT, leading to an effectively arbitrary foundation only for morality, ethics and law: accident of personal preference, the ebbs and flows of power politics, accidents of history and and the shifting sands of manipulated community opinion driven by "winds and waves of doctrine and the cunning craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming . . . " cf a video on Plato's parable of the cave; from the perspective of pondering who set up the manipulative shadow-shows, why.]
These, my friends, are the sayings of wise men, poets and prose writers, which find a way into the minds of youth. They are told by them that the highest right is might,
[ --> Evolutionary materialism -- having no IS that can properly ground OUGHT -- leads to the promotion of amorality on which the only basis for "OUGHT" is seen to be might (and manipulation: might in "spin") . . . ]
and in this way the young fall into impieties, under the idea that the Gods are not such as the law bids them imagine; and hence arise factions [ --> Evolutionary materialism-motivated amorality "naturally" leads to continual contentions and power struggles influenced by that amorality at the hands of ruthless power hungry nihilistic agendas], these philosophers inviting them to lead a true life according to nature, that is,to live in real dominion over others [ --> such amoral and/or nihilistic factions, if they gain power, "naturally" tend towards ruthless abuse and arbitrariness . . . they have not learned the habits nor accepted the principles of mutual respect, justice, fairness and keeping the civil peace of justice, so they will want to deceive, manipulate and crush -- as the consistent history of radical revolutions over the past 250 years so plainly shows again and again], and not in legal subjection to them [--> nihilistic will to power not the spirit of justice and lawfulness].
KF PS: In this context, the onward impacts of the recession induced by the pandemic and our attempts to deal with it may well be telling.kairosfocus
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
12:48 AM
12
12
48
AM
PDT
PaV, lowering the peak buys time to deploy treatments that favourably shift the partition between death and recovery for serious cases. Then, if we can fast track vaccinations, we impose artificial herd immunity. KF PS: The ECDC and other tracking statistics point to peaking for this wave: https://uncommondescent.com/medicine/tracking-covid-19-apr-3-are-we-peaking-for-this-wave/kairosfocus
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
12:21 AM
12
12
21
AM
PDT
JVL, nope, I think you do not realise that you are failing to see the effect of cumulative warrant. This is in my view part of the impact of substituting selective hyperskepticism for balanced, sober-minded prudence in our mental furniture. KF PS: This is also precisely what is warping our response to the Covid-19 pandemic, eg on HCQ etc. Notice, too how evidence that the disease is peaking, i.e. saturating, is not being recognised for what it is.kairosfocus
April 4, 2020
April
04
Apr
4
04
2020
12:09 AM
12
12
09
AM
PDT
ET: Definitely not acceptable. So it isn’t that he complained. It was his methodology. Yes, clearly against all protocol.JVL
April 3, 2020
April
04
Apr
3
03
2020
10:37 PM
10
10
37
PM
PDT
EdGeorge: In short, I have never experienced anything in my life where I felt that there must be something more, as BA77 did. I have reviewed much of the evidence that is purported to support the existence of Jesus and God, and have not found it very convincing. I could see someone coming through the same experiences and having the opposite conclusion! You were just wired differently it seems. Anyway, as I just said to PaV from now on, when I see one of your posts, I will remember the person behind the text. Thank you very much for your tale.JVL
April 3, 2020
April
04
Apr
3
03
2020
10:36 PM
10
10
36
PM
PDT
DaveS: Sorry, JVL, I don’t have an interesting transformation story like others here. And while I do engage in a few debates or discussions concerning the existence of God, outside of here, it’s not really a big part of my life. I’m more interested in issues around mathematics and philosophy. Okay! Thanks for responding honestly.JVL
April 3, 2020
April
04
Apr
3
03
2020
10:32 PM
10
10
32
PM
PDT
Pav: Your openness and sincerity are appreciated–and, may I say, by all. Thanks! Thank you for your thoughtful and open responses. I also think that to confront ones doubts one must face the opposition and their strongest arguments honestly and without distortion. Its a blessing and a curse because it is very tough to engage arguments that are contrary to what you believe. I quite agree! As to the materialist, atheist, agnostic I GET IT. I understand why when we look over history, the pain and suffering that exists in our world, the evil and mayhem, atheism to me is a reasonable position but entails more difficulties than theism. Thanks for that! I find it more parsimonious but we do see the same data. Here is my answer as a theist to the problem of evil, I don’t have one nor does anyone else, Jonathan Edwards, one of the greatest minds America has produced, spent his whole life contemplating this question and could not answer it. Those who appeal to the free will of man etc, just demonstrate to me that they dont gasp the extent of the problem, I am laying it all out here and I know this will rankle some theists here but thats a fact. As an aside I think the problem of evil is more a problem for the atheist than the theist I think you might be right in your conclusion there. A very interesting point. And I really appreciate your honesty. I will end here. JVL Ive been as honest as I can and hope this is the type of response you were looking for. Yes indeed! Thank you so much for taking it seriously and taking the time to tell us all your tale. Now when I see one of your posts I will always have your explanations in my mind as I read. Which is the point isn't it? Remember the person behind the text.JVL
April 3, 2020
April
04
Apr
3
03
2020
10:31 PM
10
10
31
PM
PDT
Public health experts are increasingly worried that Americans are underestimating how long the coronavirus pandemic will disrupt everyday life in the country, warning that the Trump administration’s timelines are offering many a false sense of comfort. Coronavirus cases are expected to peak in mid-April in many parts of the country, but quickly reopening businesses or loosening shelter-in-place rules would inevitably lead to a new surge of infections, they said. Meanwhile, other parts of the country are only now implementing restrictions and others have not yet ordered the closure of non-essential businesses, creating a patchwork response that will slow progress toward the goal of driving down transmission of the SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19.rhampton7
April 3, 2020
April
04
Apr
3
03
2020
06:51 PM
6
06
51
PM
PDT
1 2 3 4 15

Leave a Reply