Share your Status / What's on your mind?

[cabalistic]

No, but you *can* do it on a subset and make reasonable statistical extractions about the plausibility of the overall numbers. Which, again, leads to my question what kind of massive mistake you expect to be hidden in those numbers? If COVID is not the cause of the excess mortality we are seeing worldwide, what is it then?

[peter_spy]

39 minutes ago, chakkman said:

I doubt that you can easily split that. Many old people die of pneumonia. Due to lack of body defences. So, the cause of death is pneumonia, not age.

Of course the real cause of death IS age.

'Dying of old age' is not a medical term, so there's no 'of course' in this.

[Anderson]

38 minutes ago, chakkman said:

 

Of course the real cause of death IS age.

 

Nobody dies of old age. It all depends how much you're revving your body and how little you invest in healing it. You can sometimes find people who die of a stroke or a heart attack at 20-30 years if they never rested, had a lot of stress at work.

It's like a limited resource for each human organ. Easy to observe that life expectancy is much longer in developed countries precisely for this reason. Likewise old people from developed countries look like they're 50 at their real age of 70 years. Whereas people from underdeveloped countries can easily look like 70-80 years at their real age of 50.

[Springheel]

1 hour ago, chakkman said:

I doubt that you can easily split that. Many old people die of pneumonia. Due to lack of body defences. So, the cause of death is pneumonia, not age.

Of course the real cause of death IS age.

 

You didn't answer the question.  What practical difference do you see between someone who dies of pneumonia, and someone who dies of a combination of pneumonia and old age?  In both cases they would be alive if they hadn't caught pneumonia.

 

 

[STiFU]

1 hour ago, chakkman said:

I doubt that you can easily split that. Many old people die of pneumonia. Due to lack of body defences. So, the cause of death is pneumonia, not age.

"All that silly paranoia about an axe. It's the cardiac arrest that kills you, not the decapitation." 

[OrbWeaver]

3 hours ago, demagogue said:

Re: coronavirus, to put things into perspective, the mortality rate is about 2% (in a developed country; in a developing country it can be as high as 5%)

I think your numbers are slightly out of date. I haven't seen any scientist seriously suggest a mortality rate that high since about February or March. Even the infamous "Ferguson model" used to justify lockdown in the UK assumed an overall mortality rate of 0.9%, and most estimates since then have been somewhere between 0.3% and 0.6%.

Maybe if you only look at hospitalised cases you can get a fatality rate of 2-5%, but that's not equivalent to the fatality rate for the whole disease.

3 hours ago, demagogue said:

But, and this is my main point, I think in the big scheme of things, the arguably more (or anyway as) important number is going to be that ~40% of cases develop long-term complications, so-called long covid.

What is the source for the claim that 40% of cases will develop long covid?

3 hours ago, demagogue said:

I think that's going to have a staggering effect on society & the economy around the world down the road that won't even be widely recognized for a while, because we're still in the middle of it we can't even get perspective on what's happening.

Don't worry, human behaviour and government policy will have destroyed what remains of the economy and society long before the consequences of long covid have any impact, even if the prevalence of long covid really is as high as you suggest.

[chakkman]

3 hours ago, Springheel said:

You didn't answer the question.  What practical difference do you see between someone who dies of pneumonia, and someone who dies of a combination of pneumonia and old age?  In both cases they would be alive if they hadn't caught pneumonia.

 

 

A person without a weak body defence would simply not get pneumonia. Or a lot of other diseases.

Does it mean that we all should be afraid of pneumonia now? After all, it's a common cause of death for older people. 

[chakkman]

4 hours ago, peter_spy said:

'Dying of old age' is not a medical term, so there's no 'of course' in this.

Ever heard of dotage?

[Springheel]

24 minutes ago, chakkman said:

A person without a weak body defence would simply not get pneumonia. Or a lot of other diseases.

Does it mean that we all should be afraid of pneumonia now? After all, it's a common cause of death for older people. 

You keep avoiding the question about what the practical difference is.  Unless you're trying to claim that people who die from Covid deserve it because they have a "weak body defense"?

 

Quote

Ever heard of dotage?

dotage

(dōt′ij) [ME. doten, to be silly]

A pejorative term for cognitive impairment.

Medical Dictionary, © 2009 Farlex and Partners

Note that there is nothing in this definition that counters the claim that  "dying of old age is not a medical term".

[chakkman]

8 minutes ago, Springheel said:

You keep avoiding the question about what the practical difference is.  Unless you're trying to claim that people who die from Covid deserve it because they have a "weak body defense"?

I have no  idea how you come to that conclusion. Noone deserves to die from Covid. I'm just pointing out that you have to be a bit more farsighted, and see the bigger picture, otherwise you'll just chime into the hysteria choir. "Deaths by Corona", or by anything else have to be very clearly defined, and well examined, otherwise you don't have any numbers you can rely on. Should be clear to anyone who observed the WHO revising their numbers downwards.

Edited November 18, 2020 by chakkman

[chakkman]

8 minutes ago, Springheel said:

dotage

(dōt′ij) [ME. doten, to be silly]

A pejorative term for cognitive impairment.

Medical Dictionary, © 2009 Farlex and Partners

Note that there is nothing in this definition that counters the claim that  "dying of old age is not a medical term".

Sorry for not being a native English speaker. The German term is "Altersschwäche". I looked that up in the dictionary, and it came up with dotage. I have no idea what the correct English term is.

[peter_spy]

53 minutes ago, chakkman said:

Ever heard of dotage?

Yes, it's marasmus senilis in Latin, and still not a medical term. It stands for anatomical and physiological changes in human body due to getting old, which is very vague description. There's no such thing in medicine as dying strictly because of old age.

[OrbWeaver]

31 minutes ago, chakkman said:

Sorry for not being a native English speaker. The German term is "Altersschwäche". I looked that up in the dictionary, and it came up with dotage. I have no idea what the correct English term is.

infirmity, decrepitude, senility and dotage seem to be the most common suggested translations from "Altersschwäche", although interestingly none of them seem to be an exact match.

infirmity means sickness or weakness, but doesn't include the meaning of "old". Old people are often infirm (and often described as "old and infirm") but you can also be infirm without being old.

decrepitude is probably the closest match, with a meaning of "decay due to old age", although I've most often heard it applied to buildings and objects rather than people. I think calling an old person "decrepit" would be considered offensive.

senility usually refers to cognitive decline due to old age, rather than physical infirmity. A physically frail old person in full command of their mental faculties would not be described as "senile".

dotage — I don't think I've ever heard this word before.

[peter_spy]

43 minutes ago, chakkman said:

I'm just pointing out that you have to be a bit more farsighted, and see the bigger picture, otherwise you'll just chime into the hysteria choir. "Deaths by Corona", or by anything else have to be very clearly defined, and well examined, otherwise you don't have any numbers you can rely on. Should be clear to anyone who observed the WHO revising their numbers downwards.

Show us how we should be far sighted, what exactly we have to do to, and how that matters to people who died from covid per se vs. those who died due to their diagnosed or hidden diseases triggered by covid.

[chakkman]

19 minutes ago, peter_spy said:

Show us how we should be far sighted, what exactly we have to do to, and how that matters to people who died from covid per se vs. those who died due to their diagnosed or hidden diseases triggered by covid.

It's more about staying objective, sober, and not resorting to panic/hysteria. It's very important to handle things scientifically, clearly examine and see what is caused by what, and who died of what. I don't see that right now, especially with a media driving everyone crazy. And politicians and physicians having to feed the (hysteric) public feeling.

@OrbWeaver Thanks. Guess it is clear now what I meant (hopefully).

Edited November 18, 2020 by chakkman

[peter_spy]

You're still very vague and still haven't answered the question.

Btw. you also called covid "a first world problem", so I'm curious how does that fit any rational definition of that term.

Edited November 18, 2020 by peter_spy

[demagogue]

10 hours ago, OrbWeaver said:

I think your numbers are slightly out of date. I haven't seen any scientist seriously suggest a mortality rate that high since about February or March. Even the infamous "Ferguson model" used to justify lockdown in the UK assumed an overall mortality rate of 0.9%, and most estimates since then have been somewhere between 0.3% and 0.6%.

Maybe if you only look at hospitalised cases you can get a fatality rate of 2-5%, but that's not equivalent to the fatality rate for the whole disease.
 

This came from the global average which includes developed & developing countries. There's such a large difference in the mortality rates that it's really unfair to aggregate the two into one statistic, and they should be disaggregated. In my day job though, I'm mostly thinking about developing countries because that's where the real needs are. (I bet they also count differently, so in developing countries they're counting mostly just hospitalized cases as "cases", etc.) You also have to disaggregate for age and I think a few other categories for the number to be useful too.

[quote]What is the source for the claim that 40% of cases will develop long covid?[/quote]

That came from an article posted in a forum that I can't track down now. But there's lots of numbers saying lots of things in lots of different contexts (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). I mean it's going to depend on one's criteria for continuing or "long covid" symptoms, so could be more like between 10% to 30% to take two other rates tossed around. (IIRC the 40% was for literally anything, but that could include chronic fatigue, and also matches the number for SARS.) For the sake of the point, it's a much higher number than the fatality rate. The core of the point isn't actually the number (it's a higher number for I think all viruses), but the fact it's higher than usual for long covid, the long covid symptoms are more debilitating for a longer time, and just by a variation of the law of large numbers (even a smaller % is a lot of people as the pool gets larger).

I guess my personal perspective is the post-covid Facebook groups are growing by the thousands to 10s of thousands per week, and it has thousands of posts a day all posting the same debilitating problems, which is of course anecdotal, but it's like looking at the shadow of something bigger than people think.

[Carnage]

I know that in my country and more countries here in South America all deaths (even the ones that didn't have covid) were counted as corona deaths for quite some time, because autopsies weren't allowed. So I think it's difficult to get any precise numbers on the fatality rate.

[Anderson]

On 11/18/2020 at 7:19 PM, OrbWeaver said:

Don't worry, human behaviour and government policy will have destroyed what remains of the economy and society long before the consequences of long covid have any impact, even if the prevalence of long covid really is as high as you suggest.

I agree to close the church businesses in return for saving everything that's left of the economy.

[Jedi_Wannabe]

Out of left field but anybody else get roped into the Among Us phenomenon? My 8 year old has been making me play with him and I have to say it really is quite fun. There is a certain social stealth and hiding in plain sight aspect to it that really appeals to me. Plus those damn streamers keep making those fucking catchy ass songs that have been on repeat in my house and car for three weeks straight.

Also random, I would rather hunt down leaks all night than diagnose VPs. I'm an idiot when it comes to remembering to snap to grid so everything I make is different grid sizes, thus making portalling a bitch. Methinks I need to improve my workflow some, haha.

[STiFU]

22 minutes ago, Jedi_Wannabe said:

Out of left field but anybody else get roped into the Among Us phenomenon? My 8 year old has been making me play with him and I have to say it really is quite fun. There is a certain social stealth and hiding in plain sight aspect to it that really appeals to me. Plus those damn streamers keep making those fucking catchy ass songs that have been on repeat in my house and car for three weeks straight.

Also random, I would rather hunt down leaks all night than diagnose VPs. I'm an idiot when it comes to remembering to snap to grid so everything I make is different grid sizes, thus making portalling a bitch. Methinks I need to improve my workflow some, haha.

Thanks for bringing a lighter topic to this thread for a change. Haven't played among us yet, but the concept looks fun and definitely a nice change from all those battle royale games (which I also never played). I rarely play multiplayer games, but something I frequently come back to is Quake Champions. Obviously, not a game one should be playing with their child.

[Jedi_Wannabe]

What I enjoy about it is voting in between rounds and throwing other people under the bus, it’s like Survivor in space.

[peter_spy]

33 minutes ago, STiFU said:

I rarely play multiplayer games, but something I frequently come back to is Quake Champions.

I also reinstall QC from time to time, if only to check a new map or play a few rounds against bots online. IMO the main problem with QC is the downtime. Menu loading time, lack of continuity in matches, you always are kicked out to the menu after every match (can't do a quick rematch or just play a sequence of maps with the same people). You have to get back to the menu and re-connect every time.

[STiFU]

2 hours ago, peter_spy said:

I also reinstall QC from time to time, if only to check a new map or play a few rounds against bots online. IMO the main problem with QC is the downtime. Menu loading time, lack of continuity in matches, you always are kicked out to the menu after every match (can't do a quick rematch or just play a sequence of maps with the same people). You have to get back to the menu and re-connect every time.

Definitely all valid points of criticism, but I still think QC is the best Quake (and best arena shooter in general) for Duel, as the passive and active champions abbilities add a lot more depth to the game! I really enjoy watching the pros duke it out in this game in the Quake Pro League (broadcasted live with commentators every sunday on the Quake twitch-channel). Your fellow countryman Av3k is doing really well at the moment!

Anyway, I always use that downtime between matches to think about what I could do better next round and I also like to analyze the match statistics a little bit.

[peter_spy]

That is true, when I'm actually playing the game, I'm having a blast. Although I do prefer mixed bot and player teams, because typically the player skill level is too high for me. I feel like I'm playing with wallhack kiddies, when they're probably just that good