Help support TMP


"ON Health Admits Faking Total Number of Covid Deaths by 50%" Topic


33 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please do not use bad language on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Science Plus Board


Areas of Interest

General

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Showcase Article

The QuarterMaster Table Top

Need 16 square feet of gaming space, built to order?


Featured Profile Article

Report from ReaperCon 2006 - Part III

The final installment of our ReaperCon report.


1,123 hits since 5 Aug 2020
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Asteroid X05 Aug 2020 4:04 p.m. PST

The document can be found here:
link

Reported deaths were inflated to assess the impact of potential under-detection of COVID19 deaths. An inflation factor of 50% was chosen since, on average, several European countries reported under-detections of 50% in an analysis conducted by the New York
Times.
[p.3]

It was only a 50% inflation factor, though …

Martin From Canada05 Aug 2020 5:50 p.m. PST

This isn't really what you say it is. This is a planning document for calibrating the provinces' response in May of this year, and thus the fudge factor is appropriate and prudent, especially in the first days of the pandemic and absent a serological test to estimate the province-wide prevalence of the infection and the insufficient testing infrastructure at the time.

Ed Mohrmann Supporting Member of TMP06 Aug 2020 4:06 a.m. PST

Martin is correct – BUT the issue (problem ?) with
this approach is if/when folks unfamiliar with the
practice and/or who practice selective processing of
information seize on the 'inflated by 50 %' portion
and ignore/miss the 'why we did that' portion.

Circulated within the research community for which
it is intended, no problem.

Grabbed by an 'AHA !' c……..y lover, well…

Martin From Canada06 Aug 2020 4:46 a.m. PST

BUT the issue (problem ?) with
this approach is if/when folks unfamiliar with the
practice and/or who practice selective processing of
information seize on the 'inflated by 50 %' portion
and ignore/miss the 'why we did that' portion.

I've seen this before with Climategate and other various manufactured controversies that stem from deliberate misinterpretation of scientific jargon (see Mike's Nature trick ). Besides, if the general public isn't willing to be confused by jargon, there's an entire industry of wingnut welfare that will gin it up and amplify it in the fever swamps of online and talk radio will until it gets picked up as a "legitimate controversy" by appealing to the journalistic norm of asking both sides. link link

Personal logo 20thmaine Supporting Member of TMP07 Aug 2020 6:05 p.m. PST

I believe that Canada still has less deaths than the world….

Asteroid X08 Aug 2020 9:00 a.m. PST

Falsification of data is still falsification of data.

A lie is still a lie, regardless of the excuses given.

Martin From Canada08 Aug 2020 10:15 a.m. PST

Falsification of data is still falsification of data.

That statement is true, and yet not relevant in the case you're making, for this discussion, since this isn't the number of deaths reported, but the creation of a fudge factor when making decision for reopening the province of Ontario.

This is closer to saying that if the tank weighs X, the bridge has to have a load bearing capacity of X*1.5 before you send the tank over the bridge.

Personal logo 20thmaine Supporting Member of TMP09 Aug 2020 8:14 a.m. PST

A lie is still a lie, regardless of the excuses given.

Yup – for example there's one guy I can think of who lies constantly when he gives press conferences.

evil grin

And then lies about having lied. Even though the original lie has been recorded.

evil grin

Asteroid X09 Aug 2020 9:20 a.m. PST

this isn't the number of deaths reported, but the creation of a fudge factor

No, it's an admission of having deliberately lied and misled the public about the number of people who died from the Wuhan virus.

Personal logo McKinstry Supporting Member of TMP Fezian09 Aug 2020 10:07 a.m. PST

It says, in the document, that it is an "age specific fatality estimate".

It also says, specifically, right there for the public to read, that it was adjusted by the 50% factor to adjust for under-reporting.

What does it not say?

It does not claim to be an factual reporting of deaths. Merely an estimate.

It does not pretend, in any way, shape or form to have performed their calculation in any way, shape or form beyond the transparent listing of the methodology used.

Whatever website attempted to use the term falsehood (No data has been falsified if the adjustment is stated, up front, for all to see) is being disingenuous at best, or more possibly simply ignorant as to basic statistical calculation.

I also note that nobody has said x number have died from Covid-19, they have said we estimate x number have died because we believe under-reporting is well documented and we have applied a 50% fudge factor based on this widely reported source. The estimate is quite valid given the openly discussed methodology.

Further, what value on earth could exist for a public entity to deliberately mislead on Covid-19? Control? How on earth does getting your population to take a minimal safety precaution offer control and is it any more controlling than seat belts, smoking bans and laws against drunk driving?

Asteroid X09 Aug 2020 5:08 p.m. PST

If an authority (government) reports there were X number of deaths due to a disease, no one just assumes said number was an "estimate" and brush it off. That's ridiculous.

what value on earth could exist for a public entity to deliberately mislead on Covid-19? Control?

That's a question many have been asking:

link

link

link

Personal logo McKinstry Supporting Member of TMP Fezian09 Aug 2020 8:44 p.m. PST

If an authority (government) reports there were X number of deaths due to a disease

Except they did not say X number of deaths.

They said we estimate,,because of under-reporting, X number of deaths.

I believe the people of Ontario are fully capable of understanding the word estimate.

For example, it is reported 2 million people watch "Keeping up with the Kardashians". I estimate an additional 1 million people watch it but are too embarrassed to admit it. I have not falsified any data. I have not stated that three million people have appalling taste in television, I have simply estimated that three million people watch tripe.

Nothing in those links presents any argument involving data manipulation for control. The last two are simply whinging snowflakes and the first suggests Trudeau is using Covid for certain political things but not control, simply advantage in dodging things. The second is a bunch of snowflakes whining about liberty (I have to wear a mask boo-ho) and the last is simply an Aussie snowflake too stupid to know the difference between communism and the constitutional monarchy that is Australia's government.

Personal logo 20thmaine Supporting Member of TMP11 Aug 2020 5:21 p.m. PST

If an authority (government) reports there were X number of deaths due to a disease, no one just assumes said number was an "estimate" and brush it off. That's ridiculous.

Anyway, getting back to this guy who tells lies – how do we feel about that? Astonishingly he has made a claim that he did something when it was actually done by his predecessor in the job, a full two years before this guy got the position. Oh – and not once, but he's on record of claiming it was his work 150 separate times. Phew, lying – that sure is a bad thing isn't it ? As someone said earlier in this thread:

A lie is still a lie, regardless of the excuses given.

Personal logo StoneMtnMinis Supporting Member of TMP16 Aug 2020 1:43 p.m. PST

You shouldn't pick on Fauci like that. Lying just comes with the territory when your a bureaucrat.

Tumbleweed Supporting Member of TMP16 Aug 2020 1:51 p.m. PST

170,000 deaths ago Fauci was the guy telling everyone that masks need not be worn and indeed should not so there would be enough for the health care workers.

Asteroid X16 Aug 2020 7:36 p.m. PST

Only effective masks may work and only if worn properly.

Unfortunately, there is a growing trend of washable/re-usable face masks being sold and to some extent, the government even supported this trend much to our surprise. On one hand, we can see why; because they feared an on-going shortage of quality medical grade masks for the NHS, and did not want the public buying up all of the stock before the NHS can get their much-needed quota.

On the other hand, with so many people walking the streets with inadquate masks, in our eyes and many other medical experts, it is even MORE dangerous than not having a mask at all! No matter what anyone claims, a fabric face mask does not have the sufficient filtration to block bacteria and viral droplets, so giving people the confidence to go out when they are far from protected is completely the wrong thing to do. It's very concerning.

The question should be simple.

Would you buy a car that doesn't drive?

Would you buy a raincoat that isn't water proof?

Would you buy a phone that cannot make calls?

Would you buy a face mask to protect you from viruses that don't protect against viruses?

It sounds slightly condescending to layout such an obvious list of comparative questions but, it really is that simple, and painfully straight forward.

link

Surgical masks do not protect against viruses. At best, these cloth or latex barriers may help prevent the spread of germs (via coughs or sneezes) when worn by folks who are ill. A properly fitted N95 respirator mask, on the other hand, is far more likely to protect against a virus, as it can filter particulates as small as 0.3 micron. An N95 mask can filter properly only when it has created an airtight seal around your mouth and nose. Health-care workers who may be exposed to pathogens, for example, are required to go through annual N95 fit testing to ensure they are wearing the masks correctly. If you have N95 masks at home and you'd prefer to wear one in public, doing so won't hurt.

Yet, others state surgical masks do not work.

"The data on the effectiveness of masks for preventing respiratory virus infections is not very clear, " explains Dr. Andrew Stanley Pekosz of Johns Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Health. "The best data suggests that if you are ill and showing symptoms, wearing a mask can reduce the chances that you spread the virus to others."

Cloth surgical masks are not helpful

The common surgical mask you might be picturing in your head will not help you at all, Pekosz said.

link

It is not just "verbiage" …

Martin From Canada16 Aug 2020 8:30 p.m. PST

And you're completely missing the point once again. The whole thing about masks is that they don't protect the person wearing the mask, but they protect everybody else from the person wearing the mask from that's person's exhalation of water droplets containing virus particles.

At the current time, there's no "smoking gun" paper that "proves" that non-surgical/non-95 masks work at slowing down the infection, but there's a large body of observational studies (as well as a plausible mechanism showing how it would work) showing that non-surgical masks are an effective policy tool for source control of the virus.

link

link

And if you can lower the R0 of the virus via source control, that means you don't need to lower the R0 by shutting down a larger proportion of the economy.

Once again, I'll use the pants analogy.


link

The meme, perhaps, might prove useful at reinforcing the necessity of those precautions, according to Eleanor J. Murray, assistant professor of epidemiology at Boston University School of Public Health.

"I do think that it provides a useful analogy to help people understand how masks may help because it helps relate mask use to something that people can easily understand and personally, I believe that analogy is often a very useful tool for science and risk communication," Murray said.

But that's quite the Gish Gallop away from your opening allegation against my province.

Personal logo McKinstry Supporting Member of TMP Fezian17 Aug 2020 8:56 a.m. PST

We wear N-95's and they are really hard to work with, particularly with gloves, gown and face shield all of which are doubly difficult thanks to fogging when needing reading glasses to see things like reading vitals or checking measurements but other than medical personnel who wear the stuff to protect themselves, masks are to protect others.

We put cheap standard surgical masks on every patient to protect US, not them. Unless you are a medical professional the mask is solely to protect EVERYONE ELSE.

170,000 deaths ago Fauci was the guy telling everyone that masks need not be worn and indeed should not so there would be enough for the health care workers.

And he was 100% correct.

It wasn't as if he was suggesting the virus would go away with the heat or that injecting disinfectant might be a good idea to explore.

Asteroid X17 Aug 2020 1:51 p.m. PST

Martin,



So basically problem solved if you have incontinence issues, wear a diaper and no one else will get peed on.

Or should we wear diapers to help your incontinence issues? How does that work?

Asteroid X17 Aug 2020 1:52 p.m. PST

Nick Bowler18 Aug 2020 1:27 a.m. PST

wmeyers – that is not the current CDC recommendation.

"CDC recommends that people wear masks in public settings and when around people who don't live in your household, especially when other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain.
Masks may help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others.
Masks are most likely to reduce the spread of COVID-19 when they are widely used by people in public settings.
Masks should NOT be worn by children under the age of 2 or anyone who has trouble breathing, is unconscious, incapacitated, or otherwise unable to remove the mask without assistance.
Masks with exhalation valves or vents should NOT be worn to help prevent the person wearing the mask from spreading COVID-19 to others (source control)."

link

USAFpilot19 Aug 2020 6:19 p.m. PST

Imagine a virus so bad that you have to be tested to know if you even have it.

Martin From Canada19 Aug 2020 8:13 p.m. PST

Imagine a virus so bad that you have to be tested to know if you even have it.

Same can be said for HIV, and I doubt many would say that untreated HIV isn't bad…


And for the same reasons as HIV, SARS-COVID-19 has a significant non-symptomatic/pre-symptomatic transmission rate, and testing is a necessary public health tool for tracking and them minimizing the spread of the disease before it hits vulnerable populations.

Asteroid X20 Aug 2020 7:07 a.m. PST

Imagine a virus so bad that you have to be tested to know if you even have it.

And a survivability rate of 99.6% if you DO catch it!

Martin From Canada20 Aug 2020 7:41 a.m. PST

And a survivability rate of 99.6% if you DO catch it!

And a non-insignificant number of people with (likely) life-long complications that puts this in the same territory as Polio.

Asteroid X20 Aug 2020 9:32 a.m. PST

Likely?

Martin From Canada21 Aug 2020 4:25 a.m. PST

It is a novel virus after all, and it was only described late last year. That being said, there are thousands that have still not fully recovered from the virus months after the end of acute symptoms.
Science Magazine editorial:
link
Mayo Clinic info page:
link

Asteroid X21 Aug 2020 7:29 a.m. PST

Influenzas are no different, but we don't see fear-mongering regarding them.

link

link

Personal logo McKinstry Supporting Member of TMP Fezian21 Aug 2020 8:02 p.m. PST

Actually those articles show a very definite distinction that would seem pretty pale v Covid.

The first link talks about detectable pulmonary issues after 6 months, in some cases.

The second talks about cardiac issues in the first week or so of diagnosis.

Covid affects more systems more profoundly. The flu studies are dealing with common strains known for years. Let's see where Covid survivors are after a year before making specious links to the flu.

Asteroid X21 Aug 2020 8:27 p.m. PST

The comparisons are the fact that a great many illnesses have long lasting effects.

We are very quick to forget how illness affects us and how quickly not only can we succumb to it but also how it affects us. While a good reminder of our mortality, afterwards we often forget how weak and vulnerable we really are. Even to the most "common" of ailments.

Personal logo 20thmaine Supporting Member of TMP22 Aug 2020 2:51 a.m. PST

You shouldn't pick on Fauci like that. Lying just comes with the territory when your a bureaucrat.

I was thinking of someone else actually evil grin

Hint – you only know he's lying when he speaks or writes something.

Wolfhag22 Aug 2020 7:02 a.m. PST

Hint – you only know he's lying when he speaks or writes something.

Surely you must mean everyone in DC.

Let's see where Covid survivors are after a year before making specious links to the flu.

I agree. In the next 4-5 years, we'll have a better understanding of the virus, its effects, and how to combat it. At this point, there are no "experts" as it seems to be something they have not run up against before.

One expert said we need to follow the data but the data changes every day. So far their "science" is the science of guessing and unfortunately that's the best they can do.

The snarky and partisan politics just complicates the issue.

Wolfhag

Personal logo 20thmaine Supporting Member of TMP22 Aug 2020 4:45 p.m. PST

In ten years when he's officially history – in TMP terms – I'll name the name!

Oooo…..the suspense evil grin

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.