Want proof this is all now politics, pure politics? Here’s the Godmother (misquoting his own law):
Wearing a mask in public is not optional.
It’s the law.
— Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) September 28, 2020
Here is the actual state of the coronadoom crisis in all New York:
There is no crisis, and hasn’t been for months.
The Godmother is not the most brilliant ruler, but his intelligence is sufficient to understand that plot, which surely must have been brought to his attention. He therefore knowingly pretends there is a crisis when there is not, for purely political reasons.
This should be the real crime. It won’t be. He’ll get away with it.
The crisis is now purely driven by government testing, as described in detail below. After you read that, come back here and gaze at this, the number of daily tests in New York.
On the 27th, there were 6 attributed coronadoom deaths in the entire state. Some of these, because of false positives in the test, might not even be true coronadoom deaths. But testing only increases increases increases. Look at how testing and deaths have nothing to do with one another.
This is the biggest scandal of our times. But, like I said, they’ll get away with it. It’s too big an error to admit.
If you know any rulers in New York (or elsewhere) please send them this post.
We've made great progress on COVID-19, but we're not done until we hit zero. Here’s a look at the numbers:
•332 new reported cases
•61 patients admitted to hospitals
•Citywide positive tests are at 1.93%
Practice social distancing, wear face coverings and avoid large crowds.
— Mayor Bill de Blasio (@NYCMayor) September 28, 2020
You’ll notice comrade De Blasio didn’t mention deaths, because there weren’t any. Also, a target of 0 infections is not sane. How can rulers make such monumentally ignorant statements?
British ministers prepare for social lockdown in northern Britain, London: The Times. See below for the true state of the coronadoom crisis in all of UK (hint: there isn’t one).
Coronavirus: UK winter could see 85,000 deaths in second wave, says leaked Sage report. This is 60% more than the first wave. Evidence for second wave? None, save fear.
Face masks could be giving people Covid-19 immunity, researchers suggest. You have to hand it academics. A helluva sense of imagination. If wearing masks provoked immunity, why not wear one all the time and be free of disease? Why didn’t evolution, or God, think of that?
Marc Siegel, M.D., clinical professor of medicine and medical director of “Doctor Radio” at NYU Langone Health, writes in The Hill (a prog site) COVID-19 facts obscured by the politics of fear.
El Tres write in Epoch Times (a semi-prog site), The Idea for Pandemic Lockdowns Started With a High School Science Project. But those guys are trying to flog the book The Price of Panic: How the Tyranny of Experts Turned a Pandemic into a Catastrophe
MASKING OURSELVES TO DEATH: A NEW ESSAY BY MARK CRISPIN MILLER, PHD: what appears to be a complete history of the mask in insanity, including links to literature (as we did) showing masks are not worth wearing if you’re not sick—and in this case young.
El Tres return for Is The Wuhan Coronavirus Really A Chinese Bioweapon? “Bottom line: If someone tried to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein resemble the SARS-CoV-1 spike protein, they did a miserable job.”
Sources: daily tests, CDC official toll number one, number two (CDC has two official sources that have differences). The media reports are always greater than CDC numbers. Yes, these are the sources, which is why I call them “sources”, for the data. The other is the Google: type [LOCATION] coronavirus deaths. So when you email or comment asking for the sources, here they are.
Let’s start with the bad news. The very bad news. Daily—as in daily—tests:
We broke the million-a-day barrier again! Yippee!
“Say, Briggs, why are you celebrating? You hate these daily tests. What’s so good about them continuing to increase with no end in sight?”
Because now we can do some fun math. Some are reporting a false positive rate of 1%. Nobody knows the actual number, because it depends on how many people have already got the bug, the different tests’ sensitivity and specificity, and so on. The WSJ, for instance, suggests an overall accuracy of 70%, which is what civilians would consider poor, but which doctors would not find unusual. The Cochrane review found false positives of 2% (and even up to 21% in some scenarios).
In the UK, one report says “After reviewing data from British testing centres, the government research paper released last month estimated that the UK’s false positive rate has a 50% chance of sitting somewhere between 0.8% and 4%.”
Our 1% guess is in the middle, or on the low end, of all these figures. It’s not wildly wrong.
Suppose nobody in the million tests we do today have an active infection. Then, with a false positive rate of 1%, 10,000 will be incorrectly identified as “new cases”. Every single day.
Some will have an active infection, though. If 1% do, then that leaves 990,000 without, and with a 1% false positive, we still get 9,900 false “new cases”. Here’s a plot with the fraction of a million with an active infection on the x-axis, and the number of false positives on the y-axis.
Even when the fraction with active infections is a whopping 20% (fraction 0.2), the number of false daily “new cases” is still 8,000! All would be gleefully reported by our propagandists and click-baiters.
Of course, the fraction of folks who have an active infection won’t be anywhere near 0.2; it will likely be on the lower end, which means we’re reporting a huge amount of false “new cases”, which are used to continue the panic.
A reminder that cases are not positive tests. Cases are positive tests with active infection and in people who require treatment, which is not most people. Lot of emphasis there, eh? Strange that media and government can’t remember these distinctions. It’s almost as if they won’t want to remember them.
Now we have to add in the wrinkle that the test is likely not just picking up active infections, but also old ones, and also indications of infections (past or present) of other coronaviruses (which cause the common cold). These boost the true false positive rate. The test is, after all, supposed to pick up only active coronadoom infections, not old ones, and not infections other than coronadoom.
So that 4% figure noted above no longer seems so wrong. And in fact might be on the money. Sort of. Problem is, as the coronadoom makes it way through the population and herd immunity arrives, if the test is picking up past and other infections, then the false positive rate will increase through time. By how much? I don’t know.
Let’s stick with the 4% figure, though, and treat it as constant. Also assume at 10% active infection rate of people reporting for daily testing, which is likely high. We need one more number, which is the fraction of cases among true positives. The CDC estimated 40% of active infections are asymptomatic.
That’s so juicy, I want to repeat it: The CDC estimated 40% of active infections are asymptomatic. Well, we knew as much: maybe not the exact number, but the ballpark. Anyway, cases are only a fraction of active infections. Let’s be generous and say they’re 10%, which is high.
We finally arrive at this guesstimate figure:
The black line is the reported daily positive cases, which we know are too high. The blue is the likely true positive tests given the assumptions we just made. The red is the likely true cases given those same assumptions.
Well, there is lots of plus or minus to all this. So this figure should be taken as an illustration only, as a guide to the direction things are and not a bold statement of how they actually are. But it is still true we know the reported positive tests are too high. And anyway, we can see how numbers of daily tests are driving the continued panic.
Plus, we ignored false negatives, which boosts things back up. But false negatives are lower than false positives, usually much lower, though some reported numbers are higher. This is funny (strange) because it’s not typical at all. It’s as if some reports want the false negatives to be high. Lastly, many of these reported tests might be repeats on people, so we shouldn’t take the counts too literally.
With that figure in mind, here is the official CDC attributed coronadoom deaths, current as of Monday night.
Ain’t that something. True, the CDC is always adding in late counts, as we say every week, and it takes up to eight to get a full picture, but most are in by three. Et cetera. Still, it takes a confident man to predict a second wave out of this—especially given the discussion above.
Two weeks ago, frightened people were saying “Wait two weeks! The deaths will catch up!” Catch up to the reported “new cases” generated by increased testing. Uh huh.
What about the UK? They re-panicked. We saw last week they have been testing like mad, too, driving up reports of “new cases” and causing much fretting. We had to wait two weeks for them, after which deaths were sure to soar again!
Here from M. Google are the daily UK deaths:
Maybe we should wait two more weeks? And then two more after that? And two more in perpetuity?
Anyway, here are the CDC official weekly all cause death counts. As always, last three weeks are dots, it takes up to eight weeks to get all counts, but most are in by three. Dashed line is all cause minus attributed coronadoom.
That scenario we painted a month back where the most vulnerable of us died a bit early this year is no longer looking so unlikely. If these numbers hold (the trend, I mean) after the late counts are in, then we’ll know. We need to wait to be sure.
50,000 or so is the minimum from 2018-2019. And we still have to consider population increase. Reported deaths are really plunging. But, it could just be because it’s late reporting. Unusually late, though.
Here are the CDC counts of 2020 death rates (they have both counts and population) by age, for COVID and for All Causes except COVID.
Way to think of this is that the 85+ crowd had a 8.3% chance of going to the grave from causes other than coronadoom, and about a 0.9% chance of dying from the doom. Deaths are dropping, so these chances are dropping, too.
If you’re in the crucial 55-65 group, there was a 0.57% chance of dying from other than the doom, and a 0.057% chance of dying from the doom. Ten times less.
Seems rude that people are actually still dying of other things, and a higher rates than coronadoom. Another way to look at this is to divide the number of All Cause (except the doom) by the doom, to get the DEATH MULTIPLIER:
Tots under are dying at other things 560 times more often than the coronadoom. But even the 85+ crowd is still dying of other things 9.4 times more often than the coronadoom.
To support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal (in any amount) click here