Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Medical Discussion of Coronavirus

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by FIREshrink View Post

    NY Times has been posting hospitalization and death rates vaccinated vs unvaccinated for many months. I don't think it has made any difference because the people who need to get vaccinated aren't reading the NY Times.
    Rightly or wrongly, NYT has been considered a leftist leaning publication. It tends to highlight data when it supports it viewpoint and either not publish or bury things when it is in variance with its leanings. Plus it is being a paywall even it its COVID site might be free ( I have no idea).

    That is what I said a COVID specific site posting just data with no bias or agenda and let people see. Some might still not believe it and that is a given. And I want specifically people who are sick enough to be hospitalized, in ICU or six feet under, not cases of COVID which can go up in both segments and has overall lesser value.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Kamban View Post

      Rightly or wrongly, NYT has been considered a leftist leaning publication. It tends to highlight data when it supports it viewpoint and either not publish or bury things when it is in variance with its leanings. Plus it is being a paywall even it its COVID site might be free ( I have no idea).

      That is what I said a COVID specific site posting just data with no bias or agenda and let people see. Some might still not believe it and that is a given. And I want specifically people who are sick enough to be hospitalized, in ICU or six feet under, not cases of COVID which can go up in both segments and has overall lesser value.
      Article on WSJ that cases of positive covid are going up but the demand for vents is flat in the UK. It's behind a paywall:

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/omicron...rs-11641560402

      I'm linking the source data from the UK site:

      https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/deta...ited%20Kingdom

      Covid admissions and inpatients are up so there are more people getting sick (first two charts). Last chart is the number of intubated patients and that has been flat. Question is how many of those hospitalized patients deteriorate and end up needing to be intubated. I don't think it will be anywhere near delta but the sheer number of people with omicron may cause a bump in intubated patients.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Tim View Post
        I found that. Thank you.
        Again, it’s interesting to parse the data. Particularly using the different criteria. Deaths by age groups are highly in the older categories, as expected. But, that segment is highly vaccinated.
        Forgive my ignorance, but the only conclusion I can draw is older people are more likely to die from any illness. I am not qualified for judging the statistical significance. Yes, older people die more frequently than other age groups. Not sure if a third or forth booster would change that.
        I would expect both higher deaths for both vaccinated and unvaccinated. Musings only, not knowledge. Immune systems get weaker as one ages.
        Yes of course older equals more vulnerable in general. This particular disease seems to have a strong predilection for older adults, along with the obese, diabetics. That continues to be true even though that age group is also the most vaccinated. But it is a logical fallacy to conclude therefore that vaccines are ineffective. They are still highly effective at reducing serious outcomes among the elderly, but their baseline rate is very high, so even with improvement it remains elevated. In fact I'd guess that a vaccinated 85 year old has more risk from COVID than an unvaccinated 40 year old, all other things being equal, but i don't have the age group data in front of me right now.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Kamban View Post

          Rightly or wrongly, NYT has been considered a leftist leaning publication. It tends to highlight data when it supports it viewpoint and either not publish or bury things when it is in variance with its leanings. Plus it is being a paywall even it its COVID site might be free ( I have no idea).

          That is what I said a COVID specific site posting just data with no bias or agenda and let people see. Some might still not believe it and that is a given. And I want specifically people who are sick enough to be hospitalized, in ICU or six feet under, not cases of COVID which can go up in both segments and has overall lesser value.
          You mean like CDC or covidactnow?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by billy View Post
            I'm very pro vaccine, but I question the utility of a 4th vaccine booster of the same shot... If it's to protect from variants, shouldn't we be "boosting" with more variant specific vaccines a la the flu shot? (this was in reference to moderna's ceo in the news).
            lead time of 90days is fast; but not fast enough. eg. Omicron identified in Nov ~20. If immediate pivot that means would be available Feb 20.

            If all you have is a shot gun vs a dedicated rifle, use the shot gun. If Omicron was more deadly they will be certainly switching already. Fortunately, it's not

            Comment


            • Originally posted by FIREshrink View Post
              You mean like CDC or covidactnow?
              This in my corporate experience is how the CEO operates. Hire an "independent consultant" for a 6 month study that I can present to the BOD. We know the answer, but get me some "independent consultants" that will give us the ammo. You don't pay "consultants" for results that do not support the objective. It is a good way to lose your job. You don't contradict the CEO without doing it privately. Politicizing of the "independent" sources has evaporated. True for both the left and the right.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Kamban View Post

                Rightly or wrongly, NYT has been considered a leftist leaning publication. It tends to highlight data when it supports it viewpoint and either not publish or bury things when it is in variance with its leanings. Plus it is being a paywall even it its COVID site might be free ( I have no idea).

                That is what I said a COVID specific site posting just data with no bias or agenda and let people see. Some might still not believe it and that is a given. And I want specifically people who are sick enough to be hospitalized, in ICU or six feet under, not cases of COVID which can go up in both segments and has overall lesser value.
                For a while, this ER doc was soliciting and aggregating information specifically released by hospitals. You have to scroll through the thread, and I am not sure if you need a twitter account:

                https://twitter.com/DrSuperSalty/sta...47221311983619

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Kamban View Post

                  Rightly or wrongly, NYT has been considered a leftist leaning publication. It tends to highlight data when it supports it viewpoint and either not publish or bury things when it is in variance with its leanings. Plus it is being a paywall even it its COVID site might be free ( I have no idea).
                  Do you have any actual examples of this?

                  Comment


                  • I have a friend who makes the same claim about mainstream media burying all kinds of topics and so far for every single thing he's claimed got covered up there's been a story in both the Washington Post and the NY Times on that very thing - and usually multiple stories each.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by billy View Post
                      I'm very pro vaccine, but I question the utility of a 4th vaccine booster of the same shot... If it's to protect from variants, shouldn't we be "boosting" with more variant specific vaccines a la the flu shot? (this was in reference to moderna's ceo in the news).
                      I think this is where most of the country is headed. There will always be a group that will get a vaccine no matter if they say one is needed every two weeks and there is always a group that won't ever get a vaccine, but I think the large group in the middle (especially those that are healthy) is caring less and less about getting additional vaccines, especially without any solid data that says they're needed. Add to that how some countries are treating the unvaccinated and you're really going to get a lot of push back out of spite even if there is some additional benefit to further vaccines.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Shant View Post
                        I have a friend who makes the same claim about mainstream media burying all kinds of topics and so far for every single thing he's claimed got covered up there's been a story in both the Washington Post and the NY Times on that very thing - and usually multiple stories each.
                        I have had nearly identical experiences.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by AR View Post

                          Do you have any actual examples of this?
                          Are you asking for evidence that the NY times is biased?

                          The resignation of Bari Weiss because she felt free speech was not allowed is pretty good evidence of bias.

                          Her first book, "How to Fight Anti-Semitism," was a Natan Notable Book and the winner of a 2019 National Jewish Book Award.

                          As a Columbia University graduate from NY, who happens to be a liberal Jewish lesbian journalist, I would say her calling them out as too far left and closed minded is enough evidence for me.

                          That and about every article they write.

                          https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter

                          https://www.bariweiss.com/bio

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Tangler View Post

                            Are you asking for evidence that the NY times is biased?
                            No. My question was much narrower than that. Go look at the part I bolded. Kamban was talking about "data" being "buried".

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by AR View Post

                              No. My question was much narrower than that. Go look at the part I bolded. Kanban was talking about "data" being "buried".
                              Oh, Ok, "not publish or bury things "

                              In her resignation letter she hints at this and in her interviews she describes multiple cases in detail of this very activity.

                              She worked there and it is why she resigned, so she should know.

                              She has a several long interviews on multiple podcasts, but I don't think you are really interested in hearing her describe this as it would not fit with your formed opinion of the NYT.

                              I provided some links for you if you want to hear another opinion. This one is a great interview:
                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFTA9MJZ4KY

                              This is her resignation letter:
                              https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter

                              Nevertheless, I apologize for getting off the main subject and perhaps getting too close to a political discussion. I will cease and desist. have a good night.





                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Tangler View Post

                                Oh, Ok, "not publish or bury things "

                                I was more specifically (as I attempted to clarify in my last post) talking about data. Opinion pieces, which is mostly what Weiss wrote, are a bit different. And she did publish stuff there for 3 years. Sure, NYT is not going to publish the same kind of opinion pieces that you might see on TV at FOX News, but they still absolutely publish some conservative viewpoints (guys like Douthat and Stephens are frequently published). But if your point is that NYT may publish more left of center opinions than right, that's not exactly news. But as far as burying facts or failing to report major news stories is concerned, I don't think there is evidence that they really do that, and that is a much more serious criticism.

                                I had already seen most of the stuff you've linked about Weiss and my opinion has already taken those things into account. I suppose I could go on at length at the numerous flaws and inconsistencies in what she says (about this and other topics), but as you say, this isn't the place.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X