That same guy said he's worried about going out for outdoor dining. But sure, college athletes should suck it up.
Football TWO RU Players Test Positive for CV19
- Thread starter Morrischiano
- Start date
That same guy said he's worried about going out for outdoor dining. But sure, college athletes should suck it up.
The short version for T, who can't read more than a sentence or two: kyk's graphic is very misleading using incorrect data comparisons, death rates for COVID are currently ~11X greater than for a typical influenza season, overall, and flu is maybe 2X more deadly than COVID in children, so far, but there's still a ton we don't know about COVID in children, especially with MIS-C.
That "graphic" of COVID vs. influenza deaths by age group is very misleading and was constructed by FREOPP, a right wing think tank, from CDC data, but using inappropriate data (kyk - you really should cite sources). In the first link below, where the that graphic was taken from, the authors assume an average annual deaths from "influenza and pneumonia" of 60,000 per year, which is an estimate and is what the CDC reports, but it's irrelevant if we want to compare COVID to the flu since there are many sources of pneumonia in any given year, not just influenza.
https://freopp.org/estimating-the-r...vs-influenza-or-pneumonia-by-age-630aea3ae5a9
The estimate most people use for influenza deaths is ~34K/year, which is the average over 2010-11 to 2016-17 (the last 2 years are "preliminary estimates" and not included; see the 2nd link). However, keep in mind that this is an estimate made from models (not actual reported deaths, like we have for COVID) and is likely much higher than the true influenza death rate, since it includes bacterial pneumonia and other sources of death lumped in with influenza, as per the 3rd link from Scientific American where the author said, "In the last six flu seasons, the CDC’s reported number of actual confirmed flu deaths—that is, counting flu deaths the way we are currently counting deaths from the coronavirus—has ranged from 3,448 to 15,620, which is far lower than the numbers commonly repeated by public officials and even public health experts."
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/past-seasons.html
https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...u-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/
However, even if we use the somewhat inflated 34K estimate of average flu deaths per year that's still not an apples to apples comparison with COVID. Over those same 7 years, the CDC data show that, on average, there are an estimated (again from models) 25.3MM symptomatic flu cases per season, which is about 7.7% of the population; that 34K/25.3MM ratio is the symptomatic infection fatality rate (SIFR), which is 0.13%. However, to get a true comparison of apples to apples we need to know the infection fatality rate including asymptomatic cases of the flu, which the Scientific American paper estimates could be 50% and the CDC estimates is around 40% (link below). Let's be conservative and use 35% (35% asymptomatics is the same number that the CDC is currently projecting for the % of asymptomatic COVID cases), which is 8.9MM vs. 25.3MM with symptoms, which brings the total infected number up to 34.2MM. That would give a 0.10% total infection fatality rate (TIFR) for influenza (34K deaths/34.2MM total infections).
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/keyfacts.htm#:~:text=The commonly cited 5% to,didn't have any symptoms
So, from a big picture perspective, comparing TIFRs for flu vs. COVID, the comparison, then, is 0.10% for flu vs. 1.1-1.2% for COVID, which is based on the New York and Spain deaths vs. seroprevalence data from antibody testing a reasonable subset of the population. Specifically, for NY, there were 30,700 dead as of 6/13, which is an infection fatality ratio of 1.1% (vs. 2.68MM infected, given 20MM in NY with 13.4% with antibodies, which includes asymptomatic infections), which is up a bit from the 1.0% it was back on 5/1. So the apples to apples TIFRs are 0.10% to 1.1%, meaning COVID is 11X deadlier than the flu, overall, so far.
Having said that, I've been saying all along and most experts seem to agree that the eventual COVID TIFR will be 0.5-1.0%, since it's possible more vulnerable people have been infected so far and since doctors are getting better at treating COVID (once there's a near cure or vaccine, the TIFR will change completely, though - for now, we're discussing pre-cure/vaccine IFRs for comparison). One more thing: in an average year only about 34MM people are infected by the flu (including asymptomatics), which is slightly over 10% of the US: for us to reach "herd immunity" in the US for COVID we'd need to have 55-80% infected, depending on who's R0 transmission estimates one believes, which is more than 5X as many people as get infected with the flu in a typical year - so IFRs are deaths per infection, but if there are 5X as many infections, the deaths go up that much more over time. It's why anyone saying COVID is no worse than the flu, overall, is simply nuts.
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...entions-and-more.191275/page-189#post-4613691
It's much harder to find good mortality data by age group for the entire US. If someone has it, please share. Until then, I'll use NY's data, which has been the best data so far, especially since they have a decent breakdown of deaths by age and they have antibody testing. As of now, NY lists 15 deaths for the 0-17 year old age group, which would extrapolate to roughly 250 deaths for the US if NYC's rate held. Obviously, NY's death rate per 1MM is higher than everyone else's now, but that's only because NY has far more cases per 1MM (the ratio of deaths per cases is much more similar across most of the US than deaths/1MM), so IMO, it's reasonable to use NY to project eventual US numbers.
https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Fatalities?:embed=yes&:toolbar=no&:tabs=n
So, then one would compare an estimated 250 COVID deaths in the 0-17 age group to the average of roughly 450 deaths in the 0-17 year group for an "average" flu season (same CDC link). Yes, flu looks to be maybe ~2X more deadly than COVID for children (but not the 6-20X more deadly in that graphic), but then again, there's still a lot we don't know about COVID, especially the very serious MIS-C (multisymptom inflammatory syndrome - children) that is being seen much more lately (over 200 cases in NY/NJ so far) and has proven deadly in some cases (and may have been missed before).
Last edited:
Good data, thanks for posting! I remember seeing this on a former thread. CDC estimates the overall corona fatality rate at 0.25%. Not much higher than the flu's 0.1%, but definitely significant for certain demos. The biggest risk factors are obesity and diabetes. This nation needs to get healthier!
The other pandemic worsening coronavirus? Obesity.
https://www.pri.org/stories/2020-06-12/other-pandemic-worsening-coronavirus-obesity
There are a lot of possible explanations for why Japan has weathered the COVID-19 pandemic better than the United States. It’s possible that the Japanese are more used to wearing masks, that the government used contact tracing to more effectively to contain outbreaks, and that handshakes aren’t a widespread cultural practice. But according to Dariush Mozaffarian, a cardiologist and the dean of the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, one of the major reasons Japan is dealing with the coronavirus more successfully than the United States is because of another problem: obesity.
America has one of the highest rates of obesity in the developed world, and Japan has one of the lowest. And it’s obesity that’s making America’s response to COVID-19 much more difficult.
How difficult? According to a recent study of COVID-19 hospitalizations in New York City, it’s a major concern. Mozaffarian explains that, “if someone has moderate obesity … they’re about four-fold more likely to be hospitalized, if they have severe obesity … they have a six-fold higher risk of being hospitalized.” Obesity was more important in determining hospitalization than high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer and kidney disease. In fact, after age, it was the biggest factor driving hospitalizations.
And that means America is uniquely vulnerable.
Last edited:
has their been any progress on the helmets with the n95 material in them that the NFL was researching?
Only way sports can happen is in a sequester bubble.
The NBA is doing this to a degree.
With college sports it is easier since they can all be housed in the same dorm and take classes remotely. They all will be in the same gym and field so they only see others who are in the same sequester. And.... testing is more readily available so you can literally test these kids 2-3 times a week. they should also get antibody testing.
Only way sports can happen is in a sequester bubble.
The NBA is doing this to a degree.
With college sports it is easier since they can all be housed in the same dorm and take classes remotely. They all will be in the same gym and field so they only see others who are in the same sequester. And.... testing is more readily available so you can literally test these kids 2-3 times a week. they should also get antibody testing.
I had saw somewhere that there is a small degree of permanent damage to lungs .. in the bad cases that reach a respiratory infection.. that could be devastating to athletes.
CDC's estimate of 0.25 for the eventual total infection fatality rate is well below what most experts are predicting, now that we have much better data than we did a few months ago. The consensus prediction, as per the Nature article is in the 0.5-1.0% range, which is what I've been predicting for a long time.
Also you were half right on Japan. Mask-wearing, along with contact tracing, is the biggest reason they've kept their case and death rates so low, but obesity has very little to do with their low death rates. Their case rate is 141/1MM vs. the US's 7149/1MM (and growing far faster). That's a 50X difference, which is just huge. That's why they have hugely fewer deaths - hard to have deaths when you don't have cases.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01738-2
The danger is not to the football players, who are presumably overall healthy and in peak physical condition. The risk is to the high risk population which may be staff members, coaches etc. They need to make sure that the high risk population is kept away from the team. Thankfully, the Fridge is no longer coaching.
There is a big difference between forcing players, coaches and staff into close quarters for our entertainment and a healthy person under 50 consciously making the choice to dine outside with a friend.
I really don't see how people miss this.
I really don't see how people miss this.
I could actually see something like this (I'd say Feb-June) for football and hoops (and other fall sports) - still get a season in, but hopefully after we have a cure/vaccine, which is far more likely in Feb than Sept.
Yes I hope so . I don’t see how people think we will have a season this fall though
As I said above, I think a much better apples to apples comparison of COVID to influenza would be actual counted deaths from ages 0-17 (or any age group really). Well, I finally found the COVID CDC reported US age group deaths through 6/13 (103K total vs. 117K total on Worldometers on that date - it's known the CDC data lag, so they're going to be on the low side). And I finally found the CDC actual reported deaths for influenza for pediatric cases (ages 0-17), which have been reported for almost 20 years. It really shouldn't be this hard to find everything, but it is. So let's have a look, although the spoiler alert is it confirms what I said last night, that actual pediatric deaths for flu are likely only a little bit higher, not 6-20X higher.
The first link has the CDC data on COVID mortality by age and it shows 26 deaths from ages 0-14 and 125 deaths from 15-24, which would equate to ~12 deaths per 1 year increment if they were equal risk, but they're not, so let's say deaths for 15-17 are half those of 18-24 to be conservative. That would mean 18 more deaths for 15-17, making a total of 44 deaths from 0-17, by the CDC numbers and let's add 14% (6 of 44) to that, since the CDC count is 14% behind the real count, making a total of 50 deaths from 0-17. My guess is this number is fairly conservative, since extrapolating NY's 15 deaths in ages 0-19 to the US (333MM/20MM - relative populations) would give 250 deaths and even if we took 20% off that (since 0-19 is not 0-17 - a 10% difference, but doubling it since there should be more deaths for 18-19 vs. 0-17) it's still 200 deaths from 0-17 vs. the CDC number of 50. Or we could just say the COVID number is likely between about 50 and 200 deaths for 0-17 year olds.
https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku
The CDC estimated 8-year average flu deaths in the 0-17 age group of ~450 I calculated in last night's post certainly sounds a lot worse than the actual COVID deaths, but as mentioned in the previous post, flu deaths are estimated by a fairly complex model. However, for children, 0-17, the CDC actually has true death counts, since those had to be reported by every state to the CDC since 2004 an those actual reported flu deaths have ranged from 37 (2011-2012 season) to 185 deaths (2017-2018 season), as per the 2nd link below, with an average number of age 0-17 flu deaths being about 120 per season (for the same 8 years as in the post above: 2010-11 thru 2017-18).
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/faq.htm
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/pedfludeath.html
Comparing that 120 actual CDC flu deaths for 0-17 to the range of 50-200 I just estimated from the COVID data (US vs. NY) means the differences are not very large. Even if we only took the US-CDC COVID number (~50), the ratio is 2.4X, which is nowhere near the 6-20X postulated in kyk's graphic, but I think it's just as likely that there's no significant difference. This is in sharp contrast to the huge difference in the total infection fatality (TIFR) rate for COVID in the overall population vs. influenza, as I showed in last night's post, if one assumes a TIFR of 0.5-1.0% for COVID (it's 1.1% for NY now) vs.0.10% TIFR for the US for flu, giving a ratio of 5-10X for TIFRs for COVID compared to flu.
Going one step further, if the TIFR ratio is 5-10X and we have 34K estimated flu deaths per year, that's 170K-340K COVID deaths. However, as per last night's post, only about 10% of the total US population gets infected by flu every year (34MM, including asymptomatics), whereas COVID would infect 55-80% of the US based on herd immunity or 5.5-8.0X more people than flu, so multiplying just by the low end of that range (5X), we could see 850K-1700K US deaths eventually (I've been saying 900K-2600K in other posts using just the 0.5-1.0% COVID IFR times that full 5.5-8.0X multiplier, which gives 181MM-264MM infected), assuming no interventions, cure or vaccine and since we can't count on cures/vaccines (even though I think we could have a cure by Sept and a vaccine by Dec), we have to have more aggressive interventions if we want to decrease our death rates significantly, i.e., distancing first, with masks if distancing isn't possible, combined with aggressive testing, tracing and isolating (we're doing good on testing, but not on tracing/isolating).
Last edited:
FYI - CDC still at 0.25%.
Friend of mine went to Belmar yesterday. His report:
"No masks on beach, no masks on boardwalk, even ticket taker didn't wear mask. One girl in ticket booth had mask, other guy didn't, not required for patrons.
all kinds of people no masks...all having fun being respectful and living their best life."
Congrats to those living their lives to the fullest, while being responsible. Let's play some football!
:ThumbsUp
Sounds a lot like Florida a month or so ago and Georgia...Bravo to them for not letting this little flu get in their way of having some fun...
CDC still a very low outlier compared to the vast majority of infectious disease experts (predicting 0.5-1.0% IFR) and we know how well the CDC has done so far on this pandemic, i.e., shitty, with regard to testing and being very late on mask guidance.
I have zero issue with people not wearing masks when they can keep proper distancing, but not weaing a mask while being very close to others on the boardwalk and at booths is just stupid and extremely irresponsible, as those without masks could easily be infecting others, leading to serious illness and/or death. You obviously still don't get it.
The things that will likely save NJ/NY from further outbreaks is that probably 15-25% are already infected and immune (I think - not proven), plus new cases are very, very low so less spreaders, and most people are at least wearing masks in high risk activities like in close quarters inside and reports I saw probably had ~50% wearing masks on the boardwalk, which still helps some. And we now have excellent testing.
Sounds like people are being responsible, just no need for masks outside.
