RE: OT: Corona virus (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 7:49:44 PM)

Here we have another area where understanding how the numbers are counted is important...in Virginia.

That means if one person is tested three-times and all three tests come back positive, it counts as three instead of how the numbers were being counted before, which would have only been one because it was a single patient.

https://www.nbc12.com/2020/05/01/virginia-is-seeing-jump-covid-testing/



Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 7:54:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

the US never 'banned' flights from China, Italy, nor anywhere else. The US asked international flyers to voluntarily self-quarantine. So, indeed China has some responsibility in spreading this thing around the globe, but the US also did nothing to prevent it until March when random businesses were closed and many states asked folks to stay at home [until ? ...].



It did far more than ask flyers to voluntarily self quarantine. Read it for yourself.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-suspension-entry-immigrants-nonimmigrants-persons-pose-risk-transmitting-2019-novel-coronavirus/



obvert -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 7:56:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


Here is the data from FT on many countries including the US.

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-3386-4543-b2e9-0d5c6fac846c


I read that article when it initially came out...the jist of the article is that covid deaths could be under reported by as much as 60%.

I have serious questions about the validity of the numbers and presentation.

The horizontal plotting points are unclear. The x plane varies by country. We are comparing some short interval (week) to a four year average (what kind of average?), but at no point are we shown what the range of a standard deviation is for that average.

The small print below each graph is not enlightening.

Now don't get me wrong, I would be fairly surprised to see a lower death count, especially in the years comprising the average. Go back to 2008-2009, well, not so much. However, the excess deaths could as easily be coming from other sources.

Here is another very problematical analysis of numbers but with far different conclusions. It is by a Chartered Financial Advisor.

https://www.linkedin.com/content-guest/article/pandemic-2020-layoff-related-deaths-increase-covid-19-cordle-cfa




From what he says this is predictive, not analytical. He says "by our estimates there will be ..."



obvert -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 8:00:59 PM)

I looked around the map. The thing I'm most worried about in the US are these smaller outbreaks that look to be getting quite severe in many, many places. I'm looking at numbers of cases per capita, and the known cases in some areas are quite surprising. These are mostly rural counties.

With what we now hear form so many sources about 50 to 85 times the known cases being the actual number out there, these counties must be doing a lot of testing per capita but are possibly approaching herd immunity ranges. Anyone know anything about what's going on in Trousdale County, TN?


[image]local://upfiles/37283/26F7962028024D3C8508C94C51118D9A.jpg[/image]



Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 8:06:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


Here is the data from FT on many countries including the US.

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-3386-4543-b2e9-0d5c6fac846c


I read that article when it initially came out...the jist of the article is that covid deaths could be under reported by as much as 60%.

I have serious questions about the validity of the numbers and presentation.

The horizontal plotting points are unclear. The x plane varies by country. We are comparing some short interval (week) to a four year average (what kind of average?), but at no point are we shown what the range of a standard deviation is for that average.

The small print below each graph is not enlightening.

Now don't get me wrong, I would be fairly surprised to see a lower death count, especially in the years comprising the average. Go back to 2008-2009, well, not so much. However, the excess deaths could as easily be coming from other sources.

Here is another very problematical analysis of numbers but with far different conclusions. It is by a Chartered Financial Advisor.

https://www.linkedin.com/content-guest/article/pandemic-2020-layoff-related-deaths-increase-covid-19-cordle-cfa




From what he says this is predictive, not analytical. He says "by our estimates there will be ..."


My point being don't trust numbers when you can't understand how they are derived.



Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 8:08:59 PM)

Trousdale is a prison. Prisons have super high infection rates, some approaching 95%. I posted a link about it several pages back, but they have exceptionally few cases requiring hospital care.



obvert -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 8:11:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Trousdale is a prison. Prisons have super high infection rates, some approaching 95%. I posted a link about it several pages back, but they have exceptionally few cases requiring hospital care.


Makes sense. Big prison. Small population outside it.



obvert -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 8:15:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


Here is the data from FT on many countries including the US.

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-3386-4543-b2e9-0d5c6fac846c


I read that article when it initially came out...the jist of the article is that covid deaths could be under reported by as much as 60%.

I have serious questions about the validity of the numbers and presentation.

The horizontal plotting points are unclear. The x plane varies by country. We are comparing some short interval (week) to a four year average (what kind of average?), but at no point are we shown what the range of a standard deviation is for that average.

The small print below each graph is not enlightening.

Now don't get me wrong, I would be fairly surprised to see a lower death count, especially in the years comprising the average. Go back to 2008-2009, well, not so much. However, the excess deaths could as easily be coming from other sources.

Here is another very problematical analysis of numbers but with far different conclusions. It is by a Chartered Financial Advisor.

https://www.linkedin.com/content-guest/article/pandemic-2020-layoff-related-deaths-increase-covid-19-cordle-cfa




From what he says this is predictive, not analytical. He says "by our estimates there will be ..."


My point being don't trust numbers when you can't understand how they are derived.



The flu chart you posted earlier made me just wonder if Coronavirus was in NY a lot earlier than know, especially considering the subsequent outbreak.

We know all of this recently though is with distancing measures and closures in place, and they reduced the flu to nothing and have brought numbers of Covid cases down significantly in the NYC Met area.

The numbers of deaths are not accurate now, and probably will take a long time to figure out, but that isn't really that consequential either. We know this is some bad stuff, and unchecked it'll cause a lot more damage.

Now, we've got to figure out how best to open and get some jobs back to people.



Nomad -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 8:46:35 PM)

Blaine County, Idaho is where Sun Valley is. Lots of tourist traffic in the Winter, fairly small population supporting it.



Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 8:52:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


Here is the data from FT on many countries including the US.

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-3386-4543-b2e9-0d5c6fac846c


I read that article when it initially came out...the jist of the article is that covid deaths could be under reported by as much as 60%.

I have serious questions about the validity of the numbers and presentation.

The horizontal plotting points are unclear. The x plane varies by country. We are comparing some short interval (week) to a four year average (what kind of average?), but at no point are we shown what the range of a standard deviation is for that average.

The small print below each graph is not enlightening.

Now don't get me wrong, I would be fairly surprised to see a lower death count, especially in the years comprising the average. Go back to 2008-2009, well, not so much. However, the excess deaths could as easily be coming from other sources.

Here is another very problematical analysis of numbers but with far different conclusions. It is by a Chartered Financial Advisor.

https://www.linkedin.com/content-guest/article/pandemic-2020-layoff-related-deaths-increase-covid-19-cordle-cfa




From what he says this is predictive, not analytical. He says "by our estimates there will be ..."


My point being don't trust numbers when you can't understand how they are derived.



The flu chart you posted earlier made me just wonder if Coronavirus was in NY a lot earlier than know, especially considering the subsequent outbreak.

We know all of this recently though is with distancing measures and closures in place, and they reduced the flu to nothing and have brought numbers of Covid cases down significantly in the NYC Met area.

The numbers of deaths are not accurate now, and probably will take a long time to figure out, but that isn't really that consequential either. We know this is some bad stuff, and unchecked it'll cause a lot more damage.

Now, we've got to figure out how best to open and get some jobs back to people.


Here is what the CDC tells us about a H1N1 virus of 2009 (10 years later):

In the spring of 2009, a novel influenza A (H1N1) virus emerged. It was detected first in the United States and spread quickly across the United States and the world. This new H1N1 virus contained a unique combination of influenza genes not previously identified in animals or people. This virus was designated as influenza A (H1N1)pdm09 virus. From April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, CDC estimated that there were 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million), 274,304 hospitalizations (195,086-402,719), and 12,469 deaths (8,868-18,306) in the United States due to the (H1N1)pdm09 virus.* external icon

In addition the CDC estimates that from 2009 to 2018 H1N1 caused 75,000 deaths and 1,000,000 hospitalizations.

My point being if we can't have hard and fast numbers for a disease 10 years in the past, how in the world are we getting hard and fast numbers now?

In fact the influenza deaths each year is a math formula estimate.

My cynical view is that the economic lockdown is so ruinous, that our governments will make sure the numbers reported are bad enough to justify it.




obvert -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 8:54:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Blaine County, Idaho is where Sun Valley is. Lots of tourist traffic in the Winter, fairly small population supporting it.


Makes sense.



obvert -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 9:00:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


Here is the data from FT on many countries including the US.

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-3386-4543-b2e9-0d5c6fac846c


I read that article when it initially came out...the jist of the article is that covid deaths could be under reported by as much as 60%.

I have serious questions about the validity of the numbers and presentation.

The horizontal plotting points are unclear. The x plane varies by country. We are comparing some short interval (week) to a four year average (what kind of average?), but at no point are we shown what the range of a standard deviation is for that average.

The small print below each graph is not enlightening.

Now don't get me wrong, I would be fairly surprised to see a lower death count, especially in the years comprising the average. Go back to 2008-2009, well, not so much. However, the excess deaths could as easily be coming from other sources.

Here is another very problematical analysis of numbers but with far different conclusions. It is by a Chartered Financial Advisor.

https://www.linkedin.com/content-guest/article/pandemic-2020-layoff-related-deaths-increase-covid-19-cordle-cfa




From what he says this is predictive, not analytical. He says "by our estimates there will be ..."


My point being don't trust numbers when you can't understand how they are derived.



The flu chart you posted earlier made me just wonder if Coronavirus was in NY a lot earlier than know, especially considering the subsequent outbreak.

We know all of this recently though is with distancing measures and closures in place, and they reduced the flu to nothing and have brought numbers of Covid cases down significantly in the NYC Met area.

The numbers of deaths are not accurate now, and probably will take a long time to figure out, but that isn't really that consequential either. We know this is some bad stuff, and unchecked it'll cause a lot more damage.

Now, we've got to figure out how best to open and get some jobs back to people.


Here is what the CDC tells us about a H1N1 virus of 2009 (10 years later):

In the spring of 2009, a novel influenza A (H1N1) virus emerged. It was detected first in the United States and spread quickly across the United States and the world. This new H1N1 virus contained a unique combination of influenza genes not previously identified in animals or people. This virus was designated as influenza A (H1N1)pdm09 virus. From April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, CDC estimated that there were 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million), 274,304 hospitalizations (195,086-402,719), and 12,469 deaths (8,868-18,306) in the United States due to the (H1N1)pdm09 virus.* external icon

In addition the CDC estimates that from 2009 to 2018 H1N1 caused 75,000 deaths and 1,000,000 hospitalizations.

My point being if we can't have hard and fast numbers for a disease 10 years in the past, how in the world are we getting hard and fast numbers now?

In fact the influenza deaths each year is a math formula estimate.

My cynical view is that the economic lockdown is so ruinous, that our governments will make sure the numbers reported are bad enough to justify it.




I tend to think all governments are interested enough in having functioning economies they're going to do whatever they can to get things moving quickly without impaling the country with another spike of Covid.

About numbers though, this is bigger than seasonal or even H1N1 flu, and there is enough pressure that numbers will come out fairly quickly and with some accuracy. Too much focus on it not to.

As an example, the completely ridiculous claim by Matt Hancock, our health secretary, that his testing goal of 100k a day was met as of May 1 has now been (not surprisingly) reconsidered by the government after journalists found out many of the tests claimed were mail order and others were simply given to care homes without proper instruction on how to administer them.

However much people dislike headlines and negative reporting, journalism is calling governments to account all over the world right now, and that is very necessary through this kind of a crisis.



Canoerebel -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 9:04:06 PM)

Randolph County, Georgia, is adjacent to Dougherty County, where that well-publicized (and oft-discussed here) funeral outbreak occurred in February. The cases have largely died down there - it's been holding steady at 19 deaths for many days or even weeks now. That is "old news" - it doesn't represent a rural/semi-rural outbreak that's just developing.



Canoerebel -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 9:08:10 PM)

Journalism isn't merely negative nor does it hold governments accountable. It is a partisan attack dog that has adopted a bias - a world view - so that it almost always attacks one side and not the other; one side views it as an ally (rightly so) and the other as a foe (rightly so). That's just my opinion over the past 40 years but we've seen it many times here. There are the rare exceptions but that's the way it is.



Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 9:08:50 PM)

I don't think Journalism is calling government to account right now, how else could the Gov's that forced covid positive patients into senior homes still be in office?

I also think several states will milk the lockdown so as to maximize potential money from other sources. I particularly think Pennsylvania will keep the lockdown to institute changes in how we vote (which is June 2).






DD696 -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 10:06:34 PM)

So many "I Thinks".! It is a damn good thing that Marines don't think!

Covic-19 is the ****s. Just ask me, but then again, how the hell would I know?

Maybe because that so many don't think and present so much "I'm a genius and you all are simply dumshits, just like me.".



RangerJoe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 10:06:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I don't think Journalism is calling government to account right now, how else could the Gov's that forced covid positive patients into senior homes still be in office?

I also think several states will milk the lockdown so as to maximize potential money from other sources. I particularly think Pennsylvania will keep the lockdown to institute changes in how we vote (which is June 2).


As long as the voters remember that . . .



sPzAbt653 -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 10:48:42 PM)

quote:

Read it for yourself.

No thanks, don't have time to read all the links that people post. Copy and paste the relevant sentence, please.



mind_messing -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 11:18:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert


Here is the data from FT on many countries including the US.

https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-3386-4543-b2e9-0d5c6fac846c


I read that article when it initially came out...the jist of the article is that covid deaths could be under reported by as much as 60%.

I have serious questions about the validity of the numbers and presentation.

The horizontal plotting points are unclear. The x plane varies by country. We are comparing some short interval (week) to a four year average (what kind of average?), but at no point are we shown what the range of a standard deviation is for that average.

The small print below each graph is not enlightening.

Now don't get me wrong, I would be fairly surprised to see a lower death count, especially in the years comprising the average. Go back to 2008-2009, well, not so much. However, the excess deaths could as easily be coming from other sources.

Here is another very problematical analysis of numbers but with far different conclusions. It is by a Chartered Financial Advisor.

https://www.linkedin.com/content-guest/article/pandemic-2020-layoff-related-deaths-increase-covid-19-cordle-cfa







The comparison shown is deaths by week, to the four year average of deaths for that week.

There's no need to show standard deviation as the chart includes the lines for each of the years that comprise the average, allowing you to eyeball how the years vary from the average.

Amongst some of the professional stats circles that I follow, there has been the sentiment expressed that the FT has been leading the way on data vis on Covid.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Journalism isn't merely negative nor does it hold governments accountable. It is a partisan attack dog that has adopted a bias - a world view - so that it almost always attacks one side and not the other; one side views it as an ally (rightly so) and the other as a foe (rightly so). That's just my opinion over the past 40 years but we've seen it many times here. There are the rare exceptions but that's the way it is.


Point for reflection - the list of political groups that considered journalists as "foes" or opponents tended to be on the bad side.

Almost as if a profession that involves reporting on events might deviate from the "official" line. There is a strong need for the fourth estate in democracy.



Cap Mandrake -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 11:27:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe



My point being if we can't have hard and fast numbers for a disease 10 years in the past, how in the world are we getting hard and fast numbers now?

In fact the influenza deaths each year is a math formula estimate.

My cynical view is that the economic lockdown is so ruinous, that our governments will make sure the numbers reported are bad enough to justify it.





That is the job of the Office of Statistical Hand-Waving and Election Interference at the CDC



Cap Mandrake -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/3/2020 11:36:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


Point for reflection - the list of political groups that considered journalists as "foes" or opponents tended to be on the bad side.

Almost as if a profession that involves reporting on events might deviate from the "official" line. There is a strong need for the fourth estate in democracy.


That is quite an absurd generalization. For every George Wallace there is a Richard Jewell or a Thomas Paine or a Dalton Trumbo



Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/4/2020 1:07:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


The comparison shown is deaths by week, to the four year average of deaths for that week.

There's no need to show standard deviation as the chart includes the lines for each of the years that comprise the average, allowing you to eyeball how the years vary from the average.

Amongst some of the professional stats circles that I follow, there has been the sentiment expressed that the FT has been leading the way on data vis on Covid.



Some countries do show each year others don't. Some show higher deviations in past years than present.

Just some very rough calculations in percentage mode, and I agree that the disease is to be taken seriously, and that it didn't distribute thru the world equally, and there is a point in not letting the hospital system get over run, but in the States we have been at this lockdown for 50 days, first it was to flatten the curve to allow hospitals time, now it is testing, and to prevent a 2nd wave, but I think there are other forces at play than merely medical health.

-----



USA population = 330 million

USA COVID-19 deaths according to CDC = 37,000 or 67,000 (pick one)

37,000 ÷ 330,000,000 = 0.00011 = 0.011% = 1 in 10,000 (I don't think this is accurate as read for our purposes)

67,000 ÷ 330,000,000 = 0.00020 = 0.02% = 2 in 10,000 (I choose to pick this one)

USA officially reported cases = 1 million (likely cases bad enough that you would bother to get tested or institutional/job testing)

1,000,000 ÷ 330,000,000 = 0.00303 = 0.3% = 1 in 330

Or, California population = 40 million

California COVID-19 deaths = 2,200

2,200 ÷ 40,000,000 = 0.000055 = 0.0055% = 1 in 20,000

Or, world population = 7.8 billion

World deaths = 246,000

246,000 ÷ 7,800,000,000 = 0.0000315 = 0.003% = 3 in 100,000




Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/4/2020 1:13:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

That is quite an absurd generalization. For every George Wallace there is a Richard Jewell or a Thomas Paine or a Dalton Trumbo



Trumbo is Spartacus.[:)]



Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/4/2020 1:26:22 AM)

Here is a Daily Mail article:

It is grim reading, but since I am a natural born skeptic, I take it with a grain of salt. I do agree with the fact that vaccine may never be created, just like with other viruses.

The world may have to live with Covid for years to come: Imperial College London scientist warns vaccine may NEVER be created and outbreaks and lockdowns could become the norm

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8282589/Imperial-College-London-scientist-warns-lockdowns-norm.html




CaptBeefheart -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/4/2020 2:01:13 AM)

Anyone talking about keeping the lockdown until there's a vaccine should be ignored, or, if they're a politician, voted out of office.

We just had a great four-day weekend in Korea. This son of a gun is all but beat. I think it's been four or five days with ZERO indigenous cases in the country. A few trickle in at the airport each day. The latest: S. Korea reports no new local virus cases ahead of eased social distancing

I took my family to the country's largest amusement park on Thursday, which was Buddha's Birthday. It was crowded, but everyone was wearing masks and we got a complimentary temperature check on the way in. The social distancing wouldn't have passed the Karen test (i.e. it wasn't too good). We spent the night at what they call a "pension" and then went to a nearby folk village the next day, which was also fairly crowded by the time we left. It was great to get out. We met the missus's sister's family, and my wife's sister is also a nurse practitioner. If they're cool with such outings, then I'm cool. The government is still afraid to open public schools, but private ones are good to go if they want. My daughter started pre-school two weeks ago. There are about eight kids in her class and they wear masks.

Here's a Korea recap:

- No lockdowns on private business except a 10-day closure of large nightclubs in Seoul.
- No "essential" business designations: if you want to be open, stay open, and sell whatever you want within your store.
- Public schools closed fairly early, and will probably reopen within 10 days.
- No ban on people coming from other countries; however, you'll be subject to testing (from some countries) and a 14-day quarantine (from everywhere) if you come here.
- People have been enjoying the great outdoors throughout, but people do wear masks.
- Subways have remained open.
- There was a national election on April 15 and people have to cast paper ballots in person here (they don't trust mail-in or electronic ballots, and believe it or not, they require ID to vote). Turnout was higher than the average legislative election and there were zero Covid cases attributed to voting.

Good luck and may your respective lockdowns end sooner rather than later.

Cheers,
CB




Lowpe -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/4/2020 3:41:54 AM)

My wonderful state of Pennsylvania's latest covid briefing. I double dare you to watch it. Anything like this in Korea?

https://6abc.com/coronavirus-pennsylvania-covid-19-pennsylavnia-in-pa-deaths/6145127/



Sammy5IsAlive -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/4/2020 4:10:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

CNBC is running a headline about the USA having just experienced it's "Deadliest Day." The article then opens by describing how various states are easing countermeasures in the face of this news. The implications are that states are proceeding recklessly. But to get this story, CNBC fiddled with the data.

CNBC cherry-picked a 24-hour period spanning two days to get this highest total. Contrary to it's assertion, neither Thursday nor Friday were the deadliest days. The deadliest day was April 21, more than a week earlier, with 2,683 mortalities. Since then, deaths have been gradually, then a bit more, dropping.

CNB cherry-picked a 24-hour-period over two days to find the highest possible concentration of numbers . The problem with that approach is that the balance of those two days would then be hours with far less reported mortalities, so that if CNB ran the numbers for the 24 hours before or after the 24 cherrypicked, the mortality numbers would be drastically lower. But that story won't be run.

Another example of major media outlet running numbers without context - telling the truth without telling the whole truth, in effect telling a lie. Sensationalism, half-truths and untruths aren't badges of integrity.




I think when throwing stuff like that around it helps to post a link to the article so that people can check for themselves. It's as simple as https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/02/who-us-just-reported-deadliest-day-for-coronavirus.html .

Following the link and reading the article your suggestions seem a little unfair. The numbers have not been 'cherry picked' by CNBC. They are based off the WHOs situation reports, the full list of which is here https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports. The full article acknowledges - twice - the differences between the WHO and CDC methods of recording the data, and the fact that the CDC figure for that day is significantly lower.

So I think that your accusation that CNBC dishonestly 'fiddled' the numbers is baseless.

That said I don't think the article is a particularly good piece of journalism. The use of the phrase 'deadliest day' is a nonsense and in contradicted by the text of the article itself which acknowledges (not explicitly enough for my liking) that what the numbers produced both by WHO and the CDC (and indeed numbers collated and released at a more local level) represent is the recording of deaths and not the deaths themselves. I agree with you that the error is compounded by the inclusion of information about lockdown restrictions being lifted without any cautionary guidance being given to the reader making clear that this easing is not contemporaneous with the deaths that are being reported.

I think the article could also have been clearer about the implications of the differences between the WHO and CDC figures. Basically that the former is clearly running 'behind' the latter. This could have been illustrated simply by reporting the WHO's total numbers of US deaths on that date - 55337 - c.10,000 behind that being reported by the CDC.

Ironically if CNBC wanted to make a real splash they should have waited a couple of days - the WHO situation report for 3rd May reports exactly 5000 'new deaths' recorded for the US.



CaptBeefheart -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/4/2020 5:50:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

My wonderful state of Pennsylvania's latest covid briefing. I double dare you to watch it. Anything like this in Korea?

https://6abc.com/coronavirus-pennsylvania-covid-19-pennsylavnia-in-pa-deaths/6145127/


I didn't watch, since I'm at work, but I can tell you everything on that list has remained open here in Korea (unless the owner voluntarily took a hiatus--I just found out an Indian buffet restaurant near my office went offline on March 7, with no reopening date on the notice). I've been seeing my barber once every two or three weeks like always, for instance. Government-owned places like museums, the indoor part of Seoul Botanical Gardens, and the like are still shut down, but the rumor mill has it they'll open within a couple of weeks.

Cheers,
CB



obvert -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/4/2020 7:25:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I don't think Journalism is calling government to account right now, how else could the Gov's that forced covid positive patients into senior homes still be in office?

I also think several states will milk the lockdown so as to maximize potential money from other sources. I particularly think Pennsylvania will keep the lockdown to institute changes in how we vote (which is June 2).



Isn't the fact that you know about that due to journalism reporting it? You're making the case yourself.

Calling out and reporting things like the NY nursing home situation may help voters decide who they want in government. It'd be pretty hard for journalists in any situation to have any effect on the ouster of politicians within days or even weeks of such an event. There is a due process of law in the USA last time I checked.



obvert -> RE: OT: Corona virus (5/4/2020 7:32:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Journalism isn't merely negative nor does it hold governments accountable.

Unsubstantiated opinion. No positive stories out there? No examples of journalism calling out governments policies, statements, or holding governments accountable for what has happened or is happening as a result of their policies? At all?
quote:


It is a partisan attack dog that has adopted a bias - a world view - so that it almost always attacks one side and not the other; one side views it as an ally (rightly so) and the other as a foe (rightly so).

Vague and unsubstantiated opinion. Using words like "always" and supported with "rightly so" as if that somehow is different than the opinion just offered without any further justification or evidence for the "rightly."

quote:


That's just my opinion over the past 40 years but we've seen it many times here. There are the rare exceptions but that's the way it is.

Unsubstantiated opinion, as stated. "We've seen it many times" is just anecdote. I've seen rainbows many times, but that doesn't mean they're always out there, waiting to be seen. No one can read all of the news, and you cherry pick what you want to support your viewpoint.

Anytime you say always, you're in trouble. The idea that every journalist in the world has either the same "world view" which forms their bias or that they are only and always a "partizan attack dog" is as ridiculous as it is impossible. If it was true you wouldn't be reading and quoting from them daily in this thread.

To assume there are ever only two sides, "one side" and the "other" is a myopic view. Others seem to share your view, but that doesn't make it objective. There are many views, many sides, the world and human kind within it are complex and difficult and wonderful and multi-faceted, never just binary.





Page: <<   < prev  216 217 [218] 219 220   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.6914063