Our Covid Response

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
8,085
3,530
118
Country
United Kingdom
So you wanna be cautious against something that isn't death while increasing your actual risk of death?
How do any of the proposed precautions increase the risk of death?

Nothing from YouTube, lobbying groups, or pill scammers in response please.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,398
589
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
How do any of the proposed precautions increase the risk of death?

Nothing from YouTube, lobbying groups, or pill scammers in response please.
Why do you think excess deaths are up about 14% (that's not covid related)? Maybe all the unhealthy stuff people did to avoid covid that everyone warned about (and all the risk-benefit analyses talked about that you guys all ignored because you didn't like what they said)...? You guys just paid attention to the trees instead of the forest.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
8,085
3,530
118
Country
United Kingdom
Why do you think excess deaths are up about 14% (that's not covid related)? Maybe all the unhealthy stuff people did to avoid covid that everyone warned about (and all the risk-benefit analyses talked about that you guys all ignored because you didn't like what they said)...? You guys just paid attention to the trees instead of the forest.
Excess deaths are up mostly because (chronically underfunded) health systems were pushed to breaking point by covid, and were then less able to deal with other cases.

So not a result of precautions, and would've been worse without precautions. Not to mention the fact that excess deaths from covid itself still dwarf that figure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheMysteriousGX

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,398
589
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Excess deaths are up mostly because (chronically underfunded) health systems were pushed to breaking point by covid, and were then less able to deal with other cases.

So not a result of precautions, and would've been worse without precautions. Not to mention the fact that excess deaths from covid itself still dwarf that figure.
And your proof of this? So people were DoorDashing and UberEating McDonalds everyday because the hospitals were full? People are ODing on drugs because of depression is due to the hospitals being full?
 
Last edited:

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
8,085
3,530
118
Country
United Kingdom
And your proof of this?

^ significantly higher rates of hospital mortality during the pandemic in 2020 among patients without Covid, suggesting care patterns were disrupted. Also showing fewer unplanned hospital admissions for those conditions-- indicating that sufferers of these conditions were unable to get treatment at short notice due to the strain of the health service.


^ similar focus and conclusion, but with longer period studied (into 2021).


^ Imperial College London researcher attributes rise in excess mortality to an "overwhelmed" health service.

What do you expect to happen when a health service is underfunded and underprepared, and then flooded with patients requiring urgent care far outstripping its ability to provide?
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,398
589
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male

^ significantly higher rates of hospital mortality during the pandemic in 2020 among patients without Covid, suggesting care patterns were disrupted. Also showing fewer unplanned hospital admissions for those conditions-- indicating that sufferers of these conditions were unable to get treatment at short notice due to the strain of the health service.


^ similar focus and conclusion, but with longer period studied (into 2021).


^ Imperial College London researcher attributes rise in excess mortality to an "overwhelmed" health service.

What do you expect to happen when a health service is underfunded and underprepared, and then flooded with patients requiring urgent care far outstripping its ability to provide?
That doesn't say what you think it says. Less people were going to the hospital, thus the mortality rate rose because you had less people going to the hospital for minor issues (that, you know, you don't die from). And you also had people waiting longer than normal to go to the hospital and thus were getting there in worse states.

If you're trying to act like the hospitals were overrun with covid patients and they couldn't treat others, that's a load of BS. I literally work across 10+ hospitals and the countless satellite offsites and never were they overwhelmed. I did see some messed up shit because of the covid restriction BS. For example, this lady came into an offsite because she had really low blood pressure in the morning and because she had a headache (covid symptom...), the front desk lady told her she'd have to go to the main hospital to be seen. Who knows if that lady actually went there or decided to wait it out at home as hospital visits cost more. The covid policy was actually funneling more people to the hospital than needed to go there.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
8,085
3,530
118
Country
United Kingdom
That doesn't say what you think it says. Less people were going to the hospital, thus the mortality rate rose because you had less people going to the hospital for minor issues (that, you know, you don't die from).
No, the study specifically controlled for condition/diagnosis. Hospital morbidity was higher during the Covid pandemic than beforehand for the same condition. So this was not a conclusion that's been affected by minor issues having a greater prevalence in one group than the other.

If you're trying to act like the hospitals were overrun with covid patients and they couldn't treat others, that's a load of BS. I literally work across 10+ hospitals and the countless satellite offsites and never were they overwhelmed. I did see some messed up shit because of the covid restriction BS. For example, this lady came into an offsite because she had really low blood pressure in the morning and because she had a headache (covid symptom...), the front desk lady told her she'd have to go to the main hospital to be seen. Who knows if that lady actually went there or decided to wait it out at home as hospital visits cost more. The covid policy was actually funneling more people to the hospital than needed to go there.
I don't really care about your anecdotal evidence, when weighed against actual data.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,398
589
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
No, the study specifically controlled for condition/diagnosis. Hospital morbidity was higher during the Covid pandemic than beforehand for the same condition. So this was not a conclusion that's been affected by minor issues having a greater prevalence in one group than the other.



I don't really care about your anecdotal evidence, when weighed against actual data.
The study literally says they can't control for that...

There are 2 main postulated mechanisms for the higher mortality. One posits that during the pandemic, those who were hospitalized tended to have more severe disease and higher risk of death. Delays in seeking care because of fear of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 or because of barriers to access to outpatient and emergency care during the pandemic would result in patients admitted sicker and later in their illness. A second possible mechanism is that a lack of critical hospital resources such as intensive care unit beds and personnel because of the hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 resulted in lower-quality care for all patients. This latter possible mechanism is supported by greater mortality increases in rural hospitals, smaller hospitals, and hospitals that were not affiliated with medical schools during the pandemic compared with the prepandemic period.38 Also, mortality for non–SARS-CoV-2 illness during the pandemic was worse even after controlling for severity of illness.

It was not possible in this study, nor would it be in any study using only administrative data, to determine the relative contributions of those 2 mechanisms to the excess mortality. Commonly used indicators of illness severity available in administrative data, such as length of stay or intensive care unit transfers, are not valid because they were affected by pandemic-related hospital crowding and would thus contribute to artifactually low estimates of disease severity.

---


You can call my story BS all you want, but that was the policy of the hospital system I work in. If you had any covid symptom, you were sent to the hospital. How do you think that policy (with basic logic) is gonna work out?

yeah, yeah, whatever suffering and death. how about labor force participation?
It's over 2 years into covid and the article still doesn't actually know? It literally says in the preview that long covid MAY BE... At this point, it either IS or it IS NOT.
 
Last edited:

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
8,085
3,530
118
Country
United Kingdom
The study literally says they can't control for that...

There are 2 main postulated mechanisms for the higher mortality. One posits that during the pandemic, those who were hospitalized tended to have more severe disease and higher risk of death. Delays in seeking care because of fear of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 or because of barriers to access to outpatient and emergency care during the pandemic would result in patients admitted sicker and later in their illness. A second possible mechanism is that a lack of critical hospital resources such as intensive care unit beds and personnel because of the hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 resulted in lower-quality care for all patients. This latter possible mechanism is supported by greater mortality increases in rural hospitals, smaller hospitals, and hospitals that were not affiliated with medical schools during the pandemic compared with the prepandemic period.38 Also, mortality for non–SARS-CoV-2 illness during the pandemic was worse even after controlling for severity of illness.

It was not possible in this study, nor would it be in any study using only administrative data, to determine the relative contributions of those 2 mechanisms to the excess mortality. Commonly used indicators of illness severity available in administrative data, such as length of stay or intensive care unit transfers, are not valid because they were affected by pandemic-related hospital crowding and would thus contribute to artifactually low estimates of disease severity.
Note the term "using only administrative data". That quote is from the third study, which uses only administrative data owing to the enormous amount of data (almost 8.5 million admissions). The other two studies are not merely using administrative data; they explicitly state that they control for diagnosis:

Pubmed said:
Outcome was mortality in the 30 days after admission with adjusted odds generated from a 3-level (admission, hospital, and county) logistic regression model that included diagnosis [...]
Pubmed said:
Elevated mortality was seen for nearly all conditions studied during the pandemic surge periods.
The researchers in these studies specifically link excess mortality in non-Covid conditions to overwhelming pressure on the healthcare systems. How do you account for that?

You can call my story BS all you want, but that was the policy of the hospital system I work in. If you had any covid symptom, you were sent to the hospital. How do you think that policy (with basic logic) is gonna work out?
Badly. That's not a policy I'd encourage. I have no idea why you keep attributing policy recommendations to me which I've never endorsed.
 
Last edited:

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,398
589
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Note the term "using only administrative data". That quote is from the third study, which uses only administrative data owing to the enormous amount of data (almost 8.5 million admissions). The other two studies are not merely using administrative data; they explicitly state that they control for diagnosis:





The researchers in these studies specifically link excess mortality in non-Covid conditions to overwhelming pressure on the healthcare systems. How do you account for that?



Badly. That's not a policy I'd encourage. I have no idea why you keep attributing policy recommendations to me which I've never endorsed.
My exert was from the same study, they didn't adjust for what you think they adjusted for.

Because their data is limited and couldn't confirm or deny the severity of said conditions. What do you think is gonna happen when hospital admissions are down 20-40%? The people in the serious condition are the ones not going or the people with minor issues are the ones not going? Obviously, the people with minor issues aren't going meaning there's a higher % of those with serious conditions making up the pool, thus higher mortality rate, which I literally posted that before even reading that part of the study talking about it because it's basic logic.

I'm not trying to attribute the policy to something you endorsed. I'm saying that was the fucking policy, it was a dumbass policy, and only put more pressure on the hospitals because it funneled more patients to the hospitals.

I think you may have long COVID
Those using Twitter so much got long covid before covid was a thing. Using such social media platforms fucks up your mental health pretty hardcore. There's a reason why I do social media as little as possible, I only have a Facebook for messenger (Android group texting is awful) and event stuff (to, you know, see people in person); no Twitter, Tiktok, Discord, etc.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
8,085
3,530
118
Country
United Kingdom
My exert was from the same study, they didn't adjust for what you think they adjusted for.
Your exerpt was directly from the third study. It does not apply to the first or second, which categorically were not limited to administrative data.

Because their data is limited and couldn't confirm or deny the severity of said conditions. What do you think is gonna happen when hospital admissions are down 20-40%? The people in the serious condition are the ones not going or the people with minor issues are the ones not going? Obviously, the people with minor issues aren't going meaning there's a higher % of those with serious conditions making up the pool, thus higher mortality rate, which I literally posted that before even reading that part of the study talking about it because it's basic logic.
OK. And within the same conditions, mortality increased. The researchers attribute that to pressure on the health service. Why should I trust your layman's guess that they haven't properly considered it, rather than their explicit statement that they did and their professional opinion as to the cause?

I'm not trying to attribute the policy to something you endorsed. I'm saying that was the fucking policy
Then it's not relevant to our convo here.
 
Last edited:

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,398
589
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Your exerpt was directly from the third study. It does not apply to the first or second, which categorically were not limited to administrative data.



OK. And within the same conditions, mortality increased. The researchers attribute that to pressure on the health service. Why should I trust your layman's guess that they haven't properly considered it, rather than their explicit statement that they did and their professional opinion as to the cause?



Then it's not relevant to our convo here.
I really have no idea what you're trying to say. My excerpt was from the same exact study as your excerpt (well, one of your excerpts with the bold underlined "adjusted odds"). Your second excerpt (bold underlined "for nearly all conditions studied") was from the 1st study, that's behind a paywall that you can't read so I obviously can't look into that much. I don't know why you're quoting 2 different studies and trying to act (I think) like it was a from the same study.

I didn't realize until now you were pulling 2 different excerpts from 2 different studies, I assumed they were from the same study. I can't read the 1st study because it's paywalled. Have you not seen the horrible conclusions from tons of covid related studies over the last 2 years that were pretty shit? Covid is the top draw and a bunch of bad studies found their way into journals and whatnot. The CDC used the one study they did that wasn't even published in a journal or peer reviewed as evidence against natural immunity when literally ever single published and peer reviewed study said otherwise. The CDC later released data from the US that was completely in-line with all those all studies with like no fanfare or media push. Then there was that horrible study the CDC used to say schools not masking TRIPLED covid risk when the study included remote learning schools as part of the masked group. The Atlantic, that is obviously left leaning, even did a whole piece on it. That's why you don't just trust studies on a the fact that someone more educated than you did the study because that is true for all the studies.

Yeah, it is, I gave you a reason not covid-related as to why some hospitals could have easily been overwhelmed because there own damn policy funneled people to the hospital that didn't need to be there in the 1st place (the allocation of medical personnel was extremely poor with lots sitting at home or on their asses). In March of 2020, Iceland already showed that doing temperature checks doesn't really do much and the hospitals I work at were doing them forever it seemed. Most of covid policy is not backed by any data whatsoever and akin to how much the TSA makes plane travel safer (which is basically not safer at all).
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
8,085
3,530
118
Country
United Kingdom
I really have no idea what you're trying to say. My excerpt was from the same exact study as your excerpt (well, one of your excerpts with the bold underlined "adjusted odds"). Your second excerpt (bold underlined "for nearly all conditions studied") was from the 1st study, that's behind a paywall that you can't read so I obviously can't look into that much. I don't know why you're quoting 2 different studies and trying to act (I think) like it was a from the same study.
I posted three studies. You replied to the post (which contained all 3) and ascribed the excess mortality to people with "minor issues" staying home rather than being in hospital and contributing to those stats.

I then pointed out that the first two of those three studies controlled for diagnosis. You then quoted from the third to say that they didn't control for it and used only "administrative data".

I didn't realize until now you were pulling 2 different excerpts from 2 different studies, I assumed they were from the same study. I can't read the 1st study because it's paywalled. Have you not seen the horrible conclusions from tons of covid related studies over the last 2 years that were pretty shit? Covid is the top draw and a bunch of bad studies found their way into journals and whatnot. The CDC used the one study they did that wasn't even published in a journal or peer reviewed as evidence against natural immunity when literally ever single published and peer reviewed study said otherwise. The CDC later released data from the US that was completely in-line with all those all studies with like no fanfare or media push. Then there was that horrible study the CDC used to say schools not masking TRIPLED covid risk when the study included remote learning schools as part of the masked group. The Atlantic, that is obviously left leaning, even did a whole piece on it. That's why you don't just trust studies on a the fact that someone more educated than you did the study because that is true for all the studies.
So now you're just dismissing them because you assume, without any actual grounding or reason, that they're "bad" and "horrible" studies.

Dude, you're just coming to that conclusion because they don't agree with what you expect. You've not actually pointed to any methodological issue.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,398
589
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
I posted three studies. You replied to the post (which contained all 3) and ascribed the excess mortality to people with "minor issues" staying home rather than being in hospital and contributing to those stats.

I then pointed out that the first two of those three studies controlled for diagnosis. You then quoted from the third to say that they didn't control for it and used only "administrative data".



So now you're just dismissing them because you assume, without any actual grounding or reason, that they're "bad" and "horrible" studies.

Dude, you're just coming to that conclusion because they don't agree with what you expect. You've not actually pointed to any methodological issue.
The 2nd one definitely didn't control for that as they literally said they didn't. I don't know about the 1st because, again, it's paywalled. I got the long excerpt from the 2nd study. The 3rd "study" is just an article. I literally never quoted the 3rd link ever.

Nope, I literally said the opposite of what you said. I didn't say to assume the studies are bad, I said don't blindly trust studies without looking into them. I literally said the 2nd study doesn't say what you think it says because the people that wrote the study literally said in the study it doesn't say what you think it says.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,398
589
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
And shutting downs schools for 18 months did what to actually "help" kids? I kept saying schools should be open the whole time because it was rather basic common sense to keep them open yet most of you disagreed with me. And look at that, there's a 77% increase in childhood diabetes during the covid pandemic. If only someone could've predicted such consequences from closing schools. And what did closing schools actually accomplish again? Because just about every kid got exposed to covid before they were vaccinated anyway so the benefit of closing schools was basically a big fat 0 and there was only great costs in closing schools. I wonder why our peer nations didn't close schools, because they ain't that stupid.

 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
8,085
3,530
118
Country
United Kingdom
The 2nd one definitely didn't control for that as they literally said they didn't. I don't know about the 1st because, again, it's paywalled. I got the long excerpt from the 2nd study. The 3rd "study" is just an article. I literally never quoted the 3rd link ever.
Dude, the one you're referring to as "saying they didn't control for it" is the third-- the metastudy. There are two others. Go back to the post.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,398
589
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Dude, the one you're referring to as "saying they didn't control for it" is the third-- the metastudy. There are two others. Go back to the post.
From your 2nd link that leads to the full study here:

There are 2 main postulated mechanisms for the higher mortality. One posits that during the pandemic, those who were hospitalized tended to have more severe disease and higher risk of death. Delays in seeking care because of fear of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 or because of barriers to access to outpatient and emergency care during the pandemic would result in patients admitted sicker and later in their illness. A second possible mechanism is that a lack of critical hospital resources such as intensive care unit beds and personnel because of the hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 resulted in lower-quality care for all patients. This latter possible mechanism is supported by greater mortality increases in rural hospitals, smaller hospitals, and hospitals that were not affiliated with medical schools during the pandemic compared with the prepandemic period.38 Also, mortality for non–SARS-CoV-2 illness during the pandemic was worse even after controlling for severity of illness.

It was not possible in this study, nor would it be in any study using only administrative data, to determine the relative contributions of those 2 mechanisms to the excess mortality.