- Time of past OR future Camino
- CFx5
Norte
Primitivo
CP
Le Puy-SJPP
Via F
For 2024 Pilgrims: €50,- donation = 1 year with no ads on the forum + 90% off any 2024 Guide. More here. (Discount code sent to you by Private Message after your donation) |
---|
Hi Rick,The Ideas section of the April 12, 2020 Boston Globe has an article (possibly published earlier in the week) about herd immunity studies done at Harvard University. There are graphs and links. The scary part for me was that the longer the period of social distancing the more deaths overall.
The only way this ends: herd immunity - The Boston Globe
Flattening the curve was essential. But is it fueling a misconception that we can contain this disease?www.bostonglobe.com
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/04/10/opinion/its-possible-flatten-curve-too-long/
The webpage pops up with a subscription request but the close button worked.
Hi Rick,
Excellent article
Makes sense, but then so many articles do
This, initially was the Uk approach before the U turn of lockdown
I'm not a virologist so what do I know?
This is a waiting game now unfortunately
The study in Gangelt / Heinsberg was in one of the towns in Germany that had most of the SARS-CoV-2 cases per 100.000 citizens. So the average rate of infection in Germany should be (far?) below these 15 percent....
Last week, I reported a similar study from the town of Gangelt in north-western Germany where 15 per cent of the population were found to have antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. ...
The numbers of infected persons, persons in intensive care and persons who died have gone up there, too, since I posted this, but the question of the many "why"s is still being discussed. Initially, the profile of those who got infected/severely sick was different from surrounding countries because they were much younger. Also, focal points of the disease lie in certain regions in Bavaria, while numbers are comparatively low in the former East Germany for example. So, for the most severely affected areas in Bavaria, these are discussed as reasons:They themselves don't really know why the number is currently so low but have a number of ideas - the current age profile of those infected is quite different in Germany than in Italy for example - patients are noticeably younger on average - while the percentages of old and very old people in the population are quite similar in Germany and Italy. Perhaps because many German Covid-19 patients had come back from skiing holidays initially and got infected there.
It certainly isn't the flu. I saw Financial Times estimating number of Covid-19 deaths to be 60% higher than the reported numbers.View attachment 73669
This is the picture for excess deaths across Europe. This isn't the flu.
I came to this post looking for info on whether some form of Camino would be viable this year. Instead I found post after post spreading fear. Not garnered from research of data, nor actual knowledge, but widespread parroting of propaganda broadcast to the masses in the form of 'programming'.
Welcome to the forum, @goodlime. Your comment - I see it is the first comment you made on this forum and I don't know how many forum posts you had read before you made it - caused me to react because it is so different from my own impression.I know it can be very hard to maintain an objective outlook during times of extreme stress, especially when compounded by factors such as wholesale fear being peddled by the media 24/7. I'm not a professional scientist or medical professional, but I am a highly intelligent software engineer, and the analysis and presentation of data is my business.
I came to this post looking for info on whether some form of Camino would be viable this year. Instead I found post after post spreading fear. Not garnered from research of data, nor actual knowledge, but widespread parroting of propaganda broadcast to the masses in the form of 'programming'.
[...] Just trying to offer some perspective while everyone is seemingly consumed by fear and not thinking straight.
I'm basing my actions on my responsibility to my family and community, not fear.Just trying to offer some perspective while everyone is seemingly consumed by fear and not thinking straight.
BTW, if I understand correctly what you advise, there is a better approach. However, this should go into a different forum thread that touches on this topic.4. Use a calculator to figure out the number of people who would have died in the period from the date of first death until now, under normal circumstances (the U.S. example is almost exactly 12 weeks to today... ([total deaths per year] ÷ 52) x [weeks since first case])
BTW, if I understand correctly what you advise, there is a better approach. However, this should go into a different forum thread that touches on this topic.
As a rule, the relevant health statistics offices in the various countries provide mortality data by week or by day as these data vary throughout the seasons in a statistically significant way so that's more accurate and makes more sense than dividing yearly numbers by 52. The search terms you may want to use are excess deaths, exceso de mortalidad, surmortalité, Übersterblichkeit etc etc. It's a lot in our news media lately as the data for March 2020 are now available and have been published by the various national or regional statistical offices throughout Europe, and the national data for April will become available during May.
BTW, I have just looked at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm. Look at the equivalent for Spain! You can find this for Spain on the whole and for Madrid, for Castilla y Leon and for Navarra, the areas where the majority of pilgrims travel through or walk through.
I know it can be very hard to maintain an objective outlook during times of extreme stress, especially when compounded by factors such as wholesale fear being peddled by the media 24/7. I'm not a professional scientist or medical professional, but I am a highly intelligent software engineer, and the analysis and presentation of data is my business.
I came to this post looking for info on whether some form of Camino would be viable this year. Instead I found post after post spreading fear. Not garnered from research of data, nor actual knowledge, but widespread parroting of propaganda broadcast to the masses in the form of 'programming'.
I'm not going to cite data, my own findings or opinions. But I will leave you with a quick exercise you can complete in 5 minutes:
1. Look up the regular death rate (morbidity rate) for your country (is used the U.S. as my example and got the CDC numbers for 2018)
2. Look up the total number of deaths from COVID-19 in your country
3. Look up the date of the first death from COVID-19 in your country
4. Use a calculator to figure out the number of people who would have died in the period from the date of first death until now, under normal circumstances (the U.S. example is almost exactly 12 weeks to today... ([total deaths per year] ÷ 52) x [weeks since first case])
5. Compare your calculation the number you got in Step 2
6. Think about it for at least 1 minute
Perspective is a wonderful thing. I'm really not trying to downplay the potential nastiness of this virus. For the immunocompromised and people with co-factors putting them in a vulnerable population, the flu is also particularly nasty and potentially life threatening. Just trying to offer some perspective while everyone is seemingly consumed by fear and not thinking straight.
I just cannot bring myself to "like" your comment but it is good that you posted it. Although I have now lived under very similar restrictive conditions as you in Spain, and this for now over SEVEN weeks, I have moments where I am still flabbergasted by what is happening and has happened. And since this is the "figures" thread, here is a comment I just read in the Guardian. Another facet for trying to understand. Quote:30,000+ excess deaths in Spain from March 17 to April 28.So much grief and loss all around the world, but that number, for just one country, brings it home a bit more.
Have a look at the article: https://www.citylab.com/life/2018/02/theres-a-better-way-to-measure-population-density/552815/Do you mean urban population density rather than average population density.
It's mentioned in the article although I think there is another name. Quote:Many are aware of the corridor that reaches from London to Milan and includes the densely populated areas around Paris and in West Germany. It is an economic powerhouse that is described in many articles for various reasons, I even think that a name has been coined for it.
A well made video, rather convincing. Lovely Irish accent and calm voice.It's a video about the numbers :
Also a PhD and expertise in one field does not make one an expert in another field. And just being an MD does not make one a virologist or epidemiologist.A well made video, rather convincing. Lovely Irish accent and calm voice.
I sat through it ... and yet, I had of course nothing better to do than googling who Ivor Cummins is. A biochemical engineer with a background in medical device engineering who once cured himself from bad blood test results and then became some kind of a health guru on low carbs (https://thefatemperor.com).
I know that one has to remain critical but I am getting so tired of the millions of epidemiologists and public health experts that have sprung up this year like mushrooms after rain ...
What do you mean by this? Checking out the professional background and trying to assess the extent and depth of professional knowledge of a YouTuber and his qualifications as to providing reliable and useful Coronavirus specific information? Such as the producer of this video? That's not what I regard as "disparaging others in ad hominem".I'm not sure that disparaging others in ad hominem is much help towards the purpose of the thread.
What I also don't like about this Ivor Cummins guy - but I admit that's just my personal reaction - is the way he hawks his product and appeals on Twitter to people to spread his video which he praises as "crucial viewing". Quote: The #Casedemic in Europe rages on - the psychosis continues unabated. You can retweet to help break the spell, and banish the witch. We need science & rationality back - and to stop the wanton destruction of our society and freedoms. And naturally, of course, appeals for donations to his cause.
I'd watch the thing - and have done so - but I wouldn't spread it nor would I recommend it. But that's me.
This just seems wise. People put all sorts of rubbish up on YouTube. Conspiracy theorists are a dime a dozen there.What do you mean by this? Checking out the professional background and trying to assess the extent and depth of professional knowledge of a YouTuber and his qualifications as to providing reliable and useful Coronavirus specific information? Such as the producer of this video? That's not what I regard as "disparaging others in ad hominem".
I'm not an expert in this either, but do have an understanding of the ecology of invasive plant species. The models have much in common - substitute 'disperser' and/or 'pollinator' for 'vector' is all; the mathematical models converge nicely and have been traded back and forth betewwn epidemiology and ecology for some time. And you're right, @Kathar1na . The lag between initial introduction and widespread dispersal/infection is pretty universal. In part this is just a characteristic of exponential growth, but complex feedback interactions between the different components of the system are also a big part of the story.From what I understood and remember, the virus circulates for a while at low level in large families or communities in their burrows, even when they interact with other gerbil communities nearby, and under certain conditions, puff, the disease explodes and much larger numbers get infected within a specific area or group.
What do you mean by this? Checking out the professional background and trying to assess the extent and depth of professional knowledge of a YouTuber and his qualifications as to providing reliable and useful Coronavirus specific information? Such as the producer of this video? That's not what I regard as "disparaging others in ad hominem".
That didn't last long. I had of course another peek, I want to be sure of what I'm saying. About 33 minutes into the video, verbatim: "Lockdowns and stuff don't really work but they could have an effect that's negative. They are going to cause [sic] way more cancer deaths from late diagnosis and way more you know malnourishment and suicide and dreadful suffering and impacts due to destroying the economies and they are taking away our cherished freedoms and causing terrible societal impacts."I am not going to watch the video a second time.
full of opinion and not maths
It’s a great book by the way.On a lighter note and given that this is a mathematical sub post, did you know that many of the writers on the Simpsons are mathematical geniuses. They even have Bart write up a solution to the 400 year old Fermat’s last theorem........almost! View attachment 83003
One of the first sentences of the commentator: "The virus when it comes in new hits around 20% of the population. So 80% are already de facto immune ...
"The virus when it comes in new hits around 20% of the population. So 80% are already de facto immune ... t-cells, cross-immunisation ....". T
In science it is vital to consider the reputation and qualifications of the person publishing a finding.On "ad hominem" and science.
The proposition that to refute something we should attack the argument and not the person is a valid one. Unfortunately, I'm finding that as our (humanity's) knowledge increases, it is increasingly a challenging one. All too often I find that I lack the necessary knowledge myself to effectively assess the quality of an argument. On a good day, I can judge whether the conclusions follow logically from the premises. But too often I am not in a position to judge how accurate the premises are. Or to reproduce the experiment and see for myself if the reported results ensue. I am just not in the same place as an expert in the field with an extensive research and study background to judge those science reported. In areas where significant expertise is needed to accurately evaluate, there is a certain value to assessing the qualifications of the person putting forth the argument, and not just the argument themselves. I think discussing someone's qualifications and track record is not necessarily the same as judging their character and personality, and may have a place in deciding whether to believe what they propose.
Note: This a comment on the discussion (and many others I'm seeing these days) and not on this particular video.
Alas, too many people today think that they are Faradays and Einsteins. Few are.On that premise we might have discounted Michael Faraday.
In areas where significant expertise is needed to accurately evaluate, there is a certain value to assessing the qualifications of the person putting forth the argument, and not just the argument themselves. I think discussing someone's qualifications and track record is not necessarily the same as judging their character and personality, and may have a place in deciding whether to believe what they propose.
In public forums like YouTube (where there is all manner of made up expertise, conspiracy theories, and useless false 'information), assessing real expertise is essential. As @Doughnut NZ says, that kind of assessment also goes on within science - by way of peer reviews before any work is published in a reputable journal, mostly. It is essential there too.In science it is vital to consider the reputation and qualifications of the person publishing a finding.
This is a false equivalence. The way we do science now is profoundly different than it was 150 years ago. The world, technology, and systems are vastly more complex; all that requires a different kind of expertise than in Faraday's or Darwin's time when one could be an active scientist without much in the way of a formal training. Darwin had a bachelor's degree, Faraday none...other than honorary ones. Now, the level of work they were doing requires not a mere PhD, but perhaps also post-docs - and a lot of specific training.On that premise we might have discounted Michael Faraday.
Bravo. Me neither. Too many seem entitled to chime in with uninformed opinions as though they actually have something to contribute to the conversation when in fact they don't know what they don't know. Before anyone blasts me as an elitist, I would say as far as epidemiology and virology are concerned most of us (myself included) are in that category, even if we have Quite a lot of expertise in related scientific fields.He simply had enough of the unqualified comments and "critique" from people who don't have a clue but think they see through everything without any specialist qualification and without any experience whatsoever in the area.
I don't blame him.
Excuse me?Yep. question but don't discount...Covid, if allowed, is only the viral equivalent of a Ponzi scheme.
I would like to think that this is the considered and collegiate view of competent epidemiologists, but as no reference is given, it is more likely to be just another urban myth...
... the opinion is not based on personal expertise and experience in dealing with viruses and epidemics and public health related to this.
Case in point, Influenza is not a coronavirus.And besides, there's still a great deal about coronaviruses, both flu ones and SARS as well as common cold coronaviruses that simply isn't understood, else we'd have some effective cures for them.
Well, usually about 50% of the population has that kind of immunity to a typical flu virus (though that % does vary tremendously from one virus to the next) -- and the estimates that I've seen as regards Covid19 are between 15% and 60% ; but nobody actually knows yet, and it's unlikely to be known until after some years of research.
So, "up to 60%" is accurate, but somewhat misleading. But it's fairly strongly indicated that it's some number above about 10% at least, from statistics about large families stuck together in lockdown and infected with the disease.
Then again, it does appear that about 80%-90% of "cases" and cases are asymptomatic or benign, so whether you count the true asymptomatics as being "immune" or not would greatly alter what % of the population you think is "immune" to it.
But again, it's just too early to tell, and it's another one that nobody really knows yet.
Which of course doesn't prevent personal opinions on the matter.
And besides, there's still a great deal about coronaviruses, both flu ones and SARS as well as common cold coronaviruses that simply isn't understood, else we'd have some effective cures for them.
Inexpert opinion based on cherry-picked expert statements is still inexpert opinion. And when misinformation or biased uninformed opinion gets shared online the amplification can be dangerous.That's actually incorrect, as he has formed his opinions on the basis of information from expert virologists, epidemiologists, and medical research scientists working in hospitals at the centre of virus outbreaks.
Exactly.That, to me, illustrates the fundamental difference between someone with actual expertise and someone who collects information from various sources selectively and draws conclusions from it.
No need for the question mark there. They are.‘Immunity from infection’ and ‘being infected but asymptomatic’ are rather different things...?
I have to correct my statementBTW, does Germany get a lot of mention in the Cummins' video? Or at least as much as Sweden? I don't remember and I don't think so but that country doesn't fit into his scheme.
This may be ill-advised, but...This may be ill-advised, but I'm going to wade in.
....
The world, technology, and systems are vastly more complex; all that requires a different kind of expertise than in Faraday's or Darwin's time when one could be an active scientist without much in the way of a formal training. Darwin had a bachelor's degree, Faraday none...other than honorary ones. Now, the level of work they were doing requires not a mere PhD, but perhaps also post-docs - and a lot of specific training.
No, you're quite right.The fundamental ways that the universe works are not changing or growing more complex*.
What I am ready to assume is that people with much deeper knowledge and understanding of the relevant fields than I have are in a much better place to evaluate any proposed insights than I am.
The same thing you do. Could it be that the 'low death rate' was meant to be relative to the much higher rate resulting from covid mortality?What do you see?
Well yes...maybe ..be carefulIn science it is vital to consider the reputation and qualifications of the person publishing a finding.
Did he predict that 500,000 would die in the UK if total lockown was implemented or that 500,000 would die if nothing was done? They are very different predictions. If his prediction was based on nothing being done to prevent spread and then total lockdown was implemented, it does not necessarily follow that the lesser number of deaths was due to the inaccuracy of his predictions.One of our own very eminent Epidemologists from Imperial college in London ...no names mentioned predicted that 500,000 would die in the Uk with Covid...that was back in February/ March
He advised the "powers". and total lockdown was implemented
I don't understand the point of your strongly-worded post. Of course we should not be overly impressed or reliant on the letters after someone's name. Nor should we rely excessively on a quick review of Google and Wikipedia if we want to gain a good understanding of a complex issue.Well yes...maybe ..be careful
...
So just be aware that there are many "false prophets" with a lot of letters after their names .....and they're not always the ones on u tube either
...
PS....I got most of the statistics ..well all really from Google and Wikipedia!!!
And we shouldn't rely on the pronouncements of one expert in the field. I look at the consensus of experts.I don't understand the point of your strongly-worded post. Of course we should not be overly impressed or reliant on the letters after someone's name. Nor should we rely excessively on a quick review of Google and Wikipedia if we want to gain a good understanding of a complex issue.
But, @Annette london, he has become world famous: Neil Ferguson whose modelling and report published in March 2020 "subsequently made him a global public figure of hate on the libertarian right and earned him the sobriquet 'Professor Lockdown'". And you left out the juicy bits of why he and someone else broke the lockdown.One of our own very eminent Epidemologists from Imperial college in London ...no names mentioned
Actually I was responding to Dougnut NZ comment!!I don't understand the point of your strongly-worded post. Of course we should not be overly impressed or reliant on the letters after someone's name. Nor should we rely excessively on a quick review of Google and Wikipedia if we want to gain a good understanding of a complex issue.
Case in point, Influenza is not a coronavirus.
Thank you DavidDid he predict that 500,000 would die in the UK if total lockown was implemented or that 500,000 would die if nothing was done? They are very different predictions. If his prediction was based on nothing being done to prevent spread and then total lockdown was implemented, it does not necessarily follow that the lesser number of deaths was due to the inaccuracy of his predictions.
Imagine a situation where I were to accurately predict that a volcano was going to erupt and say that unless you evacuate, the 50,000 people in the nearby town would all die. So we evacuate the town and look at the ruins thereof, buried under tons of solidified lava (or ashes). But nobody died. Then people start to point at me and say I was inept. I predicted 50,000 people would die but nobody did. That would hardly be reasonable, would it?
Which isn't to say that his predictions were reasonable. I don't have the knowledge to judge them. Just that the fact that things turned out differently when aggressive preventative measures were put in place doesn't necessarily discredit them. What would discredit them is flaws in the model that others are more qualified to judge than I. And if he is coasting on his reputation, his unwillingness to share that model with fellow scientists should affect that reputation detrimentally.
Or so it seems to me. Your mileage may vary.
Inexpert opinion based on cherry-picked expert statements is still inexpert opinion. And when misinformation or biased uninformed opinion gets shared online the amplification can be dangerous.
Thanks Katerina,But, @Annette london, he has become world famous: Neil Ferguson whose modelling and report published in March 2020 "subsequently made him a global public figure of hate on the libertarian right and earned him the sobriquet 'Professor Lockdown'". And you left out the juicy bits of why he and someone else broke the lockdown.
There is a long article about the whole long story in the New Statesman of 31 July 2020: Neil Ferguson: The Covid modeller. I was surprised to read that he never met Prime Minister Boris Johnson in person during all this time.
Agree with you Trecile,And we shouldn't rely on the pronouncements of one expert in the field. I look at the consensus of experts.
I don't think he suggested blindly following anyone.the credentials, reputations and qualifications of scientists should always be checked before blindly following their findings.
I get it from a variety of mainstream news sources, supplemented by occasional forays into more specialized publications, all with a consideration of the source's qualifications, the stated assumptions and possible unstated assumptions, the possible misquoting and taking-out-of-context, the fact that knowledge is always incomplete, and sometimes even experts get it wrong.where do you get your information from as a matter of interest
Good for you!I don't think he suggested blindly following anyone.
I get it from a variety of mainstream news sources, supplemented by occasional forays into more specialized publications, all with a consideration of the source's qualifications, the stated assumptions and possible unstated assumptions, the possible misquoting and taking-out-of-context, the fact that knowledge is always incomplete, and sometimes even experts get it wrong.
Thanks for the confirmation. I think I will give it a miss now. An actual doctor has now appeared in the videomaker's Twitter feed. He even made a video of himself watching the video and commenting it. He titles it "Actual doctor watches Covid pseudoscience video." I'll let them battle it out ...The same thing you do.
I found the video that you refer to, and while I haven't watched all of it, I did read the written summaryThanks for the confirmation. I think I will give it a miss now. An actual doctor has now appeared in the videomaker's Twitter feed. He even made a video of himself watching the video and commenting it. He titles it "Actual doctor watches Covid pseudoscience video." I'll let them battle it out ...
Very informative!FYI, the youtube video below sends you to this interactive website that goes into the math of covid prevention through the wearing of masks.
https://aatishb.com/maskmath
I let it run for a while in the background and thought, ok, well ... and didn't pay close attention. I just felt a bit reassured in my own assessment which was more based on a gut feeling than on a careful study.I found the video that you refer to, and while I haven't watched all of it, I did read the written summary
Sure, if that's your preference.So then one should ignore your opinions then ?
Rick, I appreciated you adding this video to the thread. It shows compelling reasons why using masks can make a big difference in reducing the spread of covid. Add in hand washing hygiene and social distancing and we will be doing all we can for now.FYI, the youtube video below sends you to this interactive website that goes into the math of covid prevention through the wearing of masks.
https://aatishb.com/maskmath
Agree with you Trecile,
Unfortunately...or fortunately...who knows ...our powers at be DID rely on one persons prediction
.....no other scientist had the opportunity to check his model because he refused to "share"
However ...as our other eminent guy said " what's done is done and cannot be undone"
Water under the bridge and it's back to Katharinas juicy bits!
But, @Annette london, he has become world famous: Neil Ferguson whose modelling and report published in March 2020 "subsequently made him a global public figure of hate on the libertarian right and earned him the sobriquet 'Professor Lockdown'". And you left out the juicy bits of why he and someone else broke the lockdown.
There is a long article about the whole long story in the New Statesman of 31 July 2020: Neil Ferguson: The Covid modeller. I was surprised to read that he never met Prime Minister Boris Johnson in person during all this time.
Sure, if that's your preference.
An interesting quote from the article: “Pandemics are not like hurricanes. You don’t hunker down, weather the storm, and then everything goes back to normal. It’s a dynamical system, it’s a virus spreading in the human population: what happens to it depends on how we behave, how we interact.”
Huh? The quote says: what happens to it depends on how we behave, how we interact. The quote doesn't say: what happens to us depends on how we behave, how we interact.to be pedantic that's a bad opposition -- a hurricane is also a dynamic system, and its effect on populations also depends on how we behave, how we interact.
Which behaviour of individual persons are you thinking of that will significantly alter the course or strength or duration/"life span" of a hurricane?
@JabbaPapa, you react to the last post instead of looking at the whole exchange that lead to it. I find such reactions (from anyone, I hasten to add, and I've probably done it myself) sometimes frustrating because the whole exchange becomes pointless and I regret that I engaged at all - but then it would look like I agreed with a reply when I don't. This is exactly why the quote says: "Pandemics are not like hurricanes. You don’t hunker down, weather the storm". Isn't it obvious that this covers measures to protect oneself? And that these measures don't change the storm? That it's an essential difference between storms and epidemics because in the latter case protective measures do influence the course of the epidemic??? That it's not [ quote ] "a bad opposition"?I said "its effect on populations"
Thank you for that excellent article KatherinaBut, @Annette london, he has become world famous: Neil Ferguson whose modelling and report published in March 2020 "subsequently made him a global public figure of hate on the libertarian right and earned him the sobriquet 'Professor Lockdown'". And you left out the juicy bits of why he and someone else broke the lockdown.
There is a long article about the whole long story in the New Statesman of 31 July 2020: Neil Ferguson: The Covid modeller. I was surprised to read that he never met Prime Minister Boris Johnson in person during all this time.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?