Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Fun with Statistics
I have been manipulating statistics professionally for decades. It’s all been harmless fun, really, because I have been blessed to work in the candy store of life — sports television. One thing I learned over many decades of practice is that through omission and qualifiers, I can pretty much conjure up any number — positive or negative — to back up any argument you wish to make. And that is why I look at all the stats the media and governments throw out at us on the current pandemic with a bit of a jaundiced eye.
Take a look at the following from Google:
What does “-” mean? Does that mean a number is unknown or does that mean no one ever, ever recovers from COVID-19? The one thing I do know is that it means any number under “cases” never, ever goes down. Just up. And up. And up.
Those sites that do provide “recovery” information admit that the numbers are largely made up. In most jurisdictions physicians are required to report infections but they’re not required to report recoveries. And too many authorities at all levels aren’t pursuing that option, either. They’re too busy making their case to build new huge bureaucracies of “tracers” empowered to compel the citizenry to report their every move and every meeting. So while we’re having this debate about continuing, ending, or modifying lockdowns, the one question we’re not asking is “How many active cases have we had or do have at any given time?”
While people are talking about “following the science” and watching for statistical trends, I would like to remind them that good science is more than just asking questions. It’s just as important to ask the right questions to get the right answers. Unless, of course, that’s not what you’re looking for in the first place.
Published in Healthcare
It’s not even clear that having it once makes you immune. For all we know it could be like the common cold and you can just keep getting it over and over.
Or, it could be like the 1976 Swine flu vaccine and cause more health issues than the influenza itself. I’d be willing to accept a small wager that a large part of the population will cheer its discovery, then wait for you to try it first.
I have no idea what you’re saying.
Just as some vaccines are more effective than others, some are safer than others. In 1976 a Swine Flu was identified that was initially thought to be similar to the 1918 Spanish Flu and was predicted to kill a million Americans, so a vaccine was rushed into production. The epidemic never happened, but a relatively large number of people who had the vaccine came down with Guillain-Barre syndrome. That number was about 10x what the CDC considers normal for the seasonal flu shot. There are those who believe that this affected the public’s acceptance of flu shots for decades. I question how many people will immediately line up for a vaccine for COVID-19, if one is produced. Will Karens wear buttons that say “Vaccinated” or keep wearing a mask?
Saturday Night Live hung the ’76 episode on Gerald Ford.
At least half the positive cases display zero symptoms.
Are these cases ‘active’?
Can you ‘recover’ if you never had symptoms?
According to Worldometers, 3 percent are ‘serious/critical’ which I assume means hospitalized (overwhelming the health care system).
We should track how many people have zero symptoms and how many have ‘mild’ symptoms, by ‘mild’, I mean no hospital or prescription needed.
A friend of mine in Kansas was hospitalized for a few days, was on oxygen and displayed all the symptoms of covid but his test somehow came up negative. His doctor is 99% sure he had covid and the hospital test was wrong or corrupted.
We need better/more data on 2, 3 and 4
the forgotten 1976 Swine flu vaccine fiasco
good call