OT: COVID Science - Pfizer/Moderna vaccines >90% effective; Regeneron antibody cocktail looks very promising in phase II/III trial and more

[bac2therac]

I'm going to have to break my own rule about not talking about deaths, just to set the record straight. It is unequivocal that death rates in the US are rising rapidly (the 7-day avg went from about 700 to 1200 over the past 2-3 weeks) and will continue to rise rapidly until they're very likely at least in the 2000-2500 per day rate we saw in April, given that cases continue to skyrocket and as always, hospitalizations are starting to skyrocket and deaths lag cases by 2-4 weeks and hospitalizations by 1-2 weeks.

We're in for horrific pain from now through at least January, when hopefully we'll start seeing the effects of vaccines and antibody treatments. We should expect to have close to 400K COVID deaths by the end of January if we average ~2000/day until then - only much more effective masking/distancing (and possible targeted shutdowns) will reduce this somewhat. Note that many European countries, right now, have death rates that are equivalent to 2500-3000 per day on a US per capita basis. I hope I'm wrong, but for what it's worth, I was pretty accurate on my predictions for deaths from this summer's wave 2 in the US.

Im going to post death numbers from LTC later when i find the table charts

44% OF ALL COVID DEATHS ARE FROM LTC[/QUOTE]

Conntext matters..who is dying matters

 

[bac2therac]

Question for you numbers during the height of the pandemic in Jersey they were only doing 4000 tests per day now we are doing upwards of 50-55,000 per day so and also many people who had symptoms were told not even to get tested so in your opinion do you think we had this many if not more cases per day back then since our testing was so limited and people weren't even getting tested?

Plenty asymptomatics and mild cases

 

[RU848789]

Question for you numbers during the height of the pandemic in Jersey they were only doing 4000 tests per day now we are doing upwards of 50-55,000 per day so and also many people who had symptoms were told not even to get tested so in your opinion do you think we had this many if not more cases per day back then since our testing was so limited and people weren't even getting tested?

Absolutely, great question. Earlier in the thread I guesstimated (hard to know for sure) that we actually had about 2-3X the number of cases that were reported back then, so the 3500-4000 cases/day back then may have actually been around 8000-12,000/day. It's why I'm certainly concerned with the fast rise in NJ cases (around 3-4K/day now), but why I'm also hopeful that we can slow the rise down and keep it well below what would've been the actual peak last year.

It's also why hospitalizations are a far better indicator of outbreak severity and right now in NJ, they're 1/4 what they were in April (2000 vs. 8000). By testing far more people, we're seeing far more asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic people than we were in the spring. The hope is by identifying these people earlier, they can quarantine sooner (as well as their contacts), slowing the case rise. We'll see, but I think that will be the case, just looking at the math, as the doubling rate is every ~10 days now vs. every 3-4 days in the spring.

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...ase-ii-iii-trial-and-more.203426/post-4770147

 

[pmvon]

Results of the retrospective surveillance study of more than 10,000 plasma samples taken from the beginning of February to July will be published in Nature on Tuesday, November 3 at 5AM ET.
exerpt
The virus that causes COVID-19 was present in New York City long before the city’s first case of the disease was confirmed on March 1, researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai report. Their study found that more than 1.7 million New Yorkers—about 20 percent of the city’s population—have already been infected with the virus, known as SARS-CoV-2, and that the infection fatality rate of the virus is close to 1 percent, ten times deadlier than the flu.

Rubar, thanks. So this says the historical fatality rate is 1%. What about the transmission rate? If it’s 10 times deadlier if you get it but it’s also 2 times more communicable, then total lethality (made up term!) is 20 times?

Also, COVID appears to be more of a silent spreader. Are there asymptomatic flu spreaders and how long do transmission periods last?

 

[bac2therac]

We also arent stashing in nursing homes

 

[RU848789]

We actually do test for flu, in office, with results in a few minutes. Its just not tabulated with any health dept and just as often treated without a test. There is an anti viral for the flu, Tamiflu, which is effective in resolving or greatly diminishing the symptoms if started within 48 hours of getting symptoms.

The vast majority are not tested for flu, which is why the CDC flu death data are actually based on models, factoring in death rates per test done that year (a small number) and multiplying that rate times the number of estimated flu illnesses from sentinel counties that have shown some ability to predict for the country. It's why flu deaths should be taken with a large grain of salt. For COVID, with the vast majority of positives being confirmed by a PCR test, the death rates are far more accurate.

 

[pmvon]

The vast majority are not tested for flu, which is why the CDC flu death data are actually based on models, factoring in death rates per test done that year (a small number) and multiplying that rate times the number of estimated flu illnesses from sentinel counties that have shown some ability to predict for the country. It's why flu deaths should be taken with a large grain of salt. For COVID, with the vast majority of positives being confirmed by a PCR test, the death rates are far more accurate.

Numbers do you believe flu deaths are greater than CDC estimates? Thanks

 

[RU23]

maybe I'm not totally nuts here. reading between the lines you get subtle feeling that pfizer was a little less restrictive than Moderna in case definition and skewed towards a younger client. obviously I was mixing up the antigen part w AZ.
The Moderna and Pfizer studies were conducted using slightly different protocols. To be counted as a COVID-19 case, participants in the Moderna study had to have at least two symptoms of disease in addition to a positive test for the virus. The Pfizer study required only one symptom. Also, Moderna waited 14 days following the second injection to begin counting cases; Pfizer's study started counting at seven days.
Table 1
Characteristics of ongoing phase III covid-19 vaccine trials

​	Moderna​	Pfizer​	AstraZeneca (US)​	AstraZeneca (UK)​	Janssen​	Sinopharm*​	Sinovac​
Vaccine name​	mRNA-1273​	BNT162​	AZD1222​	AZD1222​	Ad26.COV2.S​	Sinopharm vaccine​	Sinovac CoronaVac​
Registration No​	NCT04470427​	NCT04368728​	NCT04516746​	NCT04400838 (UK), NCT04536051 (Brazil), NCT04444674 (South Africa)​	NCT04505722​	NCT04510207​	NCT04456595​
Target enrolment​	30 000​	43 998​	30 000​	19 330​	60 000​	45 000​	8870​
Ages eligible​	18+​	12+​	18+​	5-12, 18+​	18+​	18+​	18+​
Protocol publicly available​	Y​	Y​	Y​	N†​	Y​	N​	N​
Notable excluded populations:​
Children and adolescents​	Excluded​	Many excluded​	Excluded​	13-17 excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​
Immunocompromised patients​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​
Pregnant or breastfeeding women​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​	Excluded​
Endpoints undergoing formal study‡:​
Prevention of symptomatic disease in vaccine recipient​	Y​	Y​	Y​	Y​	Y​	Presumably§​	Y​
Reduction in severe covid-19 (hospital admission, ICU, or death)​	N​	N​	N​	N¶​	N​	N​	N​
Interruption of transmission (person to person spread)​	N​	N​

This was a good/interesting point, surprised no one else acknowledged it

 

[RU848789]

Numbers do you believe flu deaths are greater than CDC estimates? Thanks

No and neither do most epidemiologists, from what I've read. I posted a paper several months back where a host of them were saying they thought deaths were overestimated by the models. But I can't say I have any specific knowledge in that area.

 

[Yeah Baby]

But we know the death rates and we also don’t assign people who die with the flu to some other underlying cause.

Are the 240k people who would have died at that moment? If not, they died of covid.

I am just trying to understand the numbers.

Apples and oranges in my opinion. 240k died with covid. One report gives very low numbers who have died from covid. The hospitals get more money calling them covid. They don’t get that for the flu. It’s just not the same so we cannot compare.

Also I did say I think covid was way worse than the flu in the spring but I think it will level off with reasons why I think that.

Let’s all hope I’m right. I’m not an expert just hoping for less deaths. That should be the hope for all of us.

 

[RU848789]

Im going to post death numbers from LTC later when i find the table charts

44% OF ALL COVID DEATHS ARE FROM LTC

Conntext matters..who is dying matters

It's about 38% for the US according to the Times, with NY having 20% of deaths from nursing homes (41st in the country, but a high number) and NJ having 43% (24th in the US).

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...tion=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article

 

[bac2therac]

context matters...this is stuff that media and medical professionals do not tell you. Its criminal they dont tell you the FACTS AND DATA

NY is almost assuredly lying about those numbers...the guy i am sourcing this too says their deaths are likely double and would fall in line with NJ'

let it be known that almost half the deaths in New Jersey are from less than 1% of the population

 

[bac2therac]

I posted a thread on the current events board if you want to have a real in depth conversation with no worries about being flagged

 

[RU848789]

Apples and oranges in my opinion. 240k died with covid. One report gives very low numbers who have died from covid. The hospitals get more money calling them covid. They don’t get that for the flu. It’s just not the same so we cannot compare.

Also I did say I think covid was way worse than the flu in the spring but I think it will level off with reasons why I think that.

Let’s all hope I’m right. I’m not an expert just hoping for less deaths. That should be the hope for all of us.

There are no data showing low numbers of COVID deaths. None. It's far more likely that deaths are underestimated than overestimated when simply looking at excess deaths (which are over 300K since March). We're all hoping for less deaths. There are also no data showing that the CARES Act financial payouts for COVID Medicare patients (and some uninsured patients) has led to fraud and overestimation of deaths.

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/10/trump-baselessly-suggests-covid-19-deaths-inflated-for-profit/

 

[bac2therac]

Here are Pennslyvania deaths...there have been more people over the age of 95 who have died from Covid than the entire # of deaths from 0-59

also less than 100 people under the age of 45 have died of Covid in Pennslyvania

 

[Caliknight]

Way to go President Trump, VP Pence, and the rest of the Warp Speed team!

 

[Joey Bags]

No and neither do most epidemiologists, from what I've read. I posted a paper several months back where a host of them were saying they thought deaths were overestimated by the models. But I can't say I have any specific knowledge in that area.

Our life claim modeling using western european rates actually suggests that if we had the capacity to test all cases back in the spring we likely would have had around 20-30k cases a day at the peak back in early April in NJ. This is good news as we still have a decent way to go to get to spring levels. And we likely won’t hit those levels as NJ has required masking and social distancing through entire second wave whereas Europe rolled a lot of those measures back over the summer.

 

[RUfubar]

[

Editorial
October 12, 2020
Excess Deaths and the Great Pandemic of 2020
Howard Bauchner, MD1; Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD, MBA1
Author Affiliations Article Information
JAMA. 2020;324(15):1504-1505. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.20016
COVID-19 Resource Center
editorial comment icon
Editorial
Comment
related articles icon
Related
Articles
multimedia icon
Multimedia

• https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2771764
  

Video (2:24)
Excess Deaths During the Coronavirus Pandemic
Two new reports in JAMA provide updated estimates regarding the mortality associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the US. In a research letter by Woolf and colleagues, the authors update their analysis of the number of “excess” deaths in the US related to COVID-19 and other causes from March 1 through August 1, 2020.1,2 The authors report that during this 5-month period, a total of 1 336 561 deaths occurred in the US, an estimated 20% increase compared with the number of expected deaths, and representing 225 530 excess deaths.2 Approximately 67% of these excess deaths were attributable directly to COVID-19, whereas excess deaths attributed to other causes also could have been related to the pandemic in general.
A second research letter, by Bilinski and Emanuel,3 compared the US to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries with populations exceeding 5 million. The authors found that since the beginning of the pandemic, among the countries with moderate mortality (n = 8; COVID-19 deaths, 5-25/100 000) or high mortality (n = 7; COVID-19 deaths, >25/100 00), the US ranked third, with 71.6 deaths/100 000.
The importance of the estimate by Woolf et al—which suggests that for the entirety of 2020, more than 400 000 excess deaths will occur—cannot be overstated, because it accounts for what could be declines in some causes of death, like motor vehicle crashes, but increases in others, like myocardial infarction. These deaths reflect a true measure of the human cost of the Great Pandemic of 2020. As depicted in the illustration, these deaths far exceed the number of US deaths from some armed conflicts, such as the Korean War and the Vietnam War, and deaths from the 2009 H1N1 (Swine flu) pandemic, and approach the number of deaths from World War II.
In the report by Bilinski and Emanuel,3 the authors note that the US experienced high COVID-19–associated mortality and excess all-cause mortality into September 2020. After the initial peak in early spring, US death rates from COVID-19 and from all causes remained higher than rates in countries with high COVID-19 mortality.
In addition, 3 Viewpoints and an Editorial in JAMA reflect on the mental health, financial, and disparities issues related to the pandemic.
Simon and colleagues4 suggest that it is critical to consider that for every death, an estimated 9 family members are affected, such as with prolonged grief or symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder. In other words, approximately 3.5 million people could develop major mental health needs. This does not account for the thousands of health care workers in hospitals and nursing homes who have been witness to the unimaginable morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19.
Cooper and Williams5 comment on the unrelenting and seemingly intractable and embedded disparities that exist in the US and within the US health care system. They call for restorative justice. This issue is not new, but rather the COVID-19 pandemic has once again highlighted and further compounded the health, social, and economic disparities inherent in communities of color.5,6
Cutler and Summers7 suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest threat to prosperity and well-being that the US has encountered since the Great Depression that began in 1929. The authors estimated the total financial cost of the pandemic—related to lost economic output and losses related to health—at $16 trillion, or approximately 90% of the annual US gross domestic product (GDP). The estimated economic loss from COVID-19 is a staggering number, but was largely preventable, and will reverberate through society for years to come.
In an accompanying Editorial, Fineberg underscores the key ideas of the Viewpoints by Simon et al, Cooper and Williams, and Cutler and Summers, and summarizes the findings of the report by Woolf et al highlighting that the data on excess deaths related to COVID-19 are “sufficiently mortifying and motivating.”8 He also emphasizes that “an intense, persistent, multipronged, and coherent response must be the order of the day and an urgent priority for the nation.”8
Few people will forget the Great Pandemic of 2020, where and how they lived, how it substantially changed their lives, and for many, the profound human toll it has taken.

Back to top
Article Information
Corresponding Author: Howard Bauchner, MD, JAMA (Howard.Bauchner@jamanetwork.org).
Published Online: October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.20016
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
References
1.
Woolf SH, Chapman DA, Sabo RT, Weinberger DM, Hill L. Excess deaths from COVID-19 and other causes, March-April 2020. JAMA. 2020;324(5):510-513. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.11787
ArticlePubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Woolf SH, Chapman DA, Sabo RT, et al. Excess deaths from COVID-19 and other causes, March-July 2020. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19545
ArticleGoogle Scholar
3.
Bilinski A, Emanuel EJ. COVID-19 and excess all-cause mortality in the US and 18 comparison countries. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.20717
ArticleGoogle Scholar
4.
Simon NM, Saxe GN, Marmar CR. Mental health disorders related to COVID-19–related deaths. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19632
ArticleGoogle Scholar
5.
Cooper LA, Williams DR. Excess deaths from COVID-19, community bereavement, and restorative justice for communities of color. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19567
ArticleGoogle Scholar
6.
Wadhera RK, Wadhera P, Gaba P, et al. Variation in COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths across New York City boroughs. JAMA. 2020;323(21):2192-2195. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.7197
ArticlePubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Cutler DM, Summers LH. The COVID-19 pandemic and the $16 trillion virus. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19759
ArticleGoogle Scholar
8.
Fineberg HV. The toll of COVID-19. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.20019
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Comment

1 Comment for this article
October 13, 2020
Death analysis during Covid-19 pandemic
Khichar Shubhakaran, MD(Med), D.M.(Neurology) | Senior Professor and Head of Department of Neurology, MDM Hospital, Dr.S. N. Medical College, Jodhpur(Rajasthan), India-342003
This is probably the right step to analyse the ,mortality during Covid-19 pandemic which will enable us in identify the direct and indirect deaths due to Covid-19 pandemic. The analysis of such data from different ares across the globe and their correlation with available healthcare resources will facilitate the way we tackle the situation and its further consequences so as to plan future strategies.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
See More About
Population Health Public Health Coronavirus (COVID19)

Coronavirus Resource Center
Trending

• News
  is learningCombining Rapid PCR and Antibody Tests Improved COVID-19 Diagnosis
  October 13, 2020
• Research
  is learning has multimediaExcess Deaths From COVID-19 and Other Causes, March-July 2020
  October 20, 2020
• Opinion
  is learningExcess Deaths From COVID-19, Community Bereavement, and Restorative Justice for Communities of Color
  October 20, 2020

Select Your Interests

JOB LISTINGS ON JAMA CAREER CENTER®
CLINICAL FACULTY: BARIATRIC MEDICINEPhoenix, Arizona
ICU TRAINED PHYSICIANS and HOSPITALISTS: Urgent Help Needed in ICU's with Banner Health in AZ and CO(Phoenix – Tucson – Northern Colorado Front Range)
Nocturnist - Critical Care Intensivist OpportunityLynchburg, VA
Executive Medical Director Primary CareLynchburg, VA
MEDICAL DIRECTOR: CARE MANAGEMENT - Banner Health - Phoenix, ArizonaPhoenix, Arizona
See more at JAMA Career Center
Others Also Liked

1. Deaths spike 20% in U.S. during 4-month period
   Healio
2. Excess mortality from COVID-19 in NYC comparable to peak of 1918 flu pandemic
   Healio

1. Prevalence of diabetes, hypertension among COVID-19 patients likely lower than reported
   By Michael Monostra, Healio, 2020

Powered by




Trending

• Excess Deaths From COVID-19, Community Bereavement, and Restorative Justice for Communities of Color
  JAMA
  
  Opinion
  
  October 20, 2020
• Excess Deaths From COVID-19 and Other Causes, March-July 2020
  JAMA
  
  Research
  
  October 20, 2020
• Estimation of Excess Deaths From COVID-19 in the United States, March to May 2020
  JAMA Internal Medicine
  
  Research
  
  October 1, 2020

JAMA
JAMA Network
Help

Get the latest from JAMA
Sign Up
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

© 2020 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
Terms of Use| Privacy Policy| Accessibility Statement

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue

 

[Caliknight]

It's astonishing to me that there are arguments over wearing masks, when the science for them being far more effective than not wearing masks is crystal clear. Every country that is doing very well against COVID has near universal mask wearing. We do not and Europe does not either.

They don’t work. LA has been wearing masks since forever. Cases are on the rise. If they worked, that wouldn’t be the case. In fact, the opposite would be true. Even a simpleton can understand that.

 

[bac2therac]

why is it that masks didnt fare too well in any studies done before corona

 

[pmvon]

[

Editorial
October 12, 2020
Excess Deaths and the Great Pandemic of 2020
Howard Bauchner, MD1; Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD, MBA1
Author Affiliations Article Information
JAMA. 2020;324(15):1504-1505. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.20016
COVID-19 Resource Center
editorial comment icon
Editorial
Comment
related articles icon
Related
Articles
multimedia icon
Multimedia

• https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2771764
  

Video (2:24)
Excess Deaths During the Coronavirus Pandemic
Two new reports in JAMA provide updated estimates regarding the mortality associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the US. In a research letter by Woolf and colleagues, the authors update their analysis of the number of “excess” deaths in the US related to COVID-19 and other causes from March 1 through August 1, 2020.1,2 The authors report that during this 5-month period, a total of 1 336 561 deaths occurred in the US, an estimated 20% increase compared with the number of expected deaths, and representing 225 530 excess deaths.2 Approximately 67% of these excess deaths were attributable directly to COVID-19, whereas excess deaths attributed to other causes also could have been related to the pandemic in general.
A second research letter, by Bilinski and Emanuel,3 compared the US to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries with populations exceeding 5 million. The authors found that since the beginning of the pandemic, among the countries with moderate mortality (n = 8; COVID-19 deaths, 5-25/100 000) or high mortality (n = 7; COVID-19 deaths, >25/100 00), the US ranked third, with 71.6 deaths/100 000.
The importance of the estimate by Woolf et al—which suggests that for the entirety of 2020, more than 400 000 excess deaths will occur—cannot be overstated, because it accounts for what could be declines in some causes of death, like motor vehicle crashes, but increases in others, like myocardial infarction. These deaths reflect a true measure of the human cost of the Great Pandemic of 2020. As depicted in the illustration, these deaths far exceed the number of US deaths from some armed conflicts, such as the Korean War and the Vietnam War, and deaths from the 2009 H1N1 (Swine flu) pandemic, and approach the number of deaths from World War II.
In the report by Bilinski and Emanuel,3 the authors note that the US experienced high COVID-19–associated mortality and excess all-cause mortality into September 2020. After the initial peak in early spring, US death rates from COVID-19 and from all causes remained higher than rates in countries with high COVID-19 mortality.
In addition, 3 Viewpoints and an Editorial in JAMA reflect on the mental health, financial, and disparities issues related to the pandemic.
Simon and colleagues4 suggest that it is critical to consider that for every death, an estimated 9 family members are affected, such as with prolonged grief or symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder. In other words, approximately 3.5 million people could develop major mental health needs. This does not account for the thousands of health care workers in hospitals and nursing homes who have been witness to the unimaginable morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19.
Cooper and Williams5 comment on the unrelenting and seemingly intractable and embedded disparities that exist in the US and within the US health care system. They call for restorative justice. This issue is not new, but rather the COVID-19 pandemic has once again highlighted and further compounded the health, social, and economic disparities inherent in communities of color.5,6
Cutler and Summers7 suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest threat to prosperity and well-being that the US has encountered since the Great Depression that began in 1929. The authors estimated the total financial cost of the pandemic—related to lost economic output and losses related to health—at $16 trillion, or approximately 90% of the annual US gross domestic product (GDP). The estimated economic loss from COVID-19 is a staggering number, but was largely preventable, and will reverberate through society for years to come.
In an accompanying Editorial, Fineberg underscores the key ideas of the Viewpoints by Simon et al, Cooper and Williams, and Cutler and Summers, and summarizes the findings of the report by Woolf et al highlighting that the data on excess deaths related to COVID-19 are “sufficiently mortifying and motivating.”8 He also emphasizes that “an intense, persistent, multipronged, and coherent response must be the order of the day and an urgent priority for the nation.”8
Few people will forget the Great Pandemic of 2020, where and how they lived, how it substantially changed their lives, and for many, the profound human toll it has taken.

Back to top
Article Information
Corresponding Author: Howard Bauchner, MD, JAMA (Howard.Bauchner@jamanetwork.org).
Published Online: October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.20016
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
References
1.
Woolf SH, Chapman DA, Sabo RT, Weinberger DM, Hill L. Excess deaths from COVID-19 and other causes, March-April 2020. JAMA. 2020;324(5):510-513. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.11787
ArticlePubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Woolf SH, Chapman DA, Sabo RT, et al. Excess deaths from COVID-19 and other causes, March-July 2020. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19545
ArticleGoogle Scholar
3.
Bilinski A, Emanuel EJ. COVID-19 and excess all-cause mortality in the US and 18 comparison countries. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.20717
ArticleGoogle Scholar
4.
Simon NM, Saxe GN, Marmar CR. Mental health disorders related to COVID-19–related deaths. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19632
ArticleGoogle Scholar
5.
Cooper LA, Williams DR. Excess deaths from COVID-19, community bereavement, and restorative justice for communities of color. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19567
ArticleGoogle Scholar
6.
Wadhera RK, Wadhera P, Gaba P, et al. Variation in COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths across New York City boroughs. JAMA. 2020;323(21):2192-2195. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.7197
ArticlePubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Cutler DM, Summers LH. The COVID-19 pandemic and the $16 trillion virus. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19759
ArticleGoogle Scholar
8.
Fineberg HV. The toll of COVID-19. JAMA. Published online October 12, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.20019
ArticleGoogle Scholar
Comment

1 Comment for this article
October 13, 2020
Death analysis during Covid-19 pandemic
Khichar Shubhakaran, MD(Med), D.M.(Neurology) | Senior Professor and Head of Department of Neurology, MDM Hospital, Dr.S. N. Medical College, Jodhpur(Rajasthan), India-342003
This is probably the right step to analyse the ,mortality during Covid-19 pandemic which will enable us in identify the direct and indirect deaths due to Covid-19 pandemic. The analysis of such data from different ares across the globe and their correlation with available healthcare resources will facilitate the way we tackle the situation and its further consequences so as to plan future strategies.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
See More About
Population Health Public Health Coronavirus (COVID19)

Coronavirus Resource Center
Trending

• News
  is learningCombining Rapid PCR and Antibody Tests Improved COVID-19 Diagnosis
  October 13, 2020
• Research
  is learning has multimediaExcess Deaths From COVID-19 and Other Causes, March-July 2020
  October 20, 2020
• Opinion
  is learningExcess Deaths From COVID-19, Community Bereavement, and Restorative Justice for Communities of Color
  October 20, 2020

Select Your Interests

JOB LISTINGS ON JAMA CAREER CENTER®
CLINICAL FACULTY: BARIATRIC MEDICINEPhoenix, Arizona
ICU TRAINED PHYSICIANS and HOSPITALISTS: Urgent Help Needed in ICU's with Banner Health in AZ and CO(Phoenix – Tucson – Northern Colorado Front Range)
Nocturnist - Critical Care Intensivist OpportunityLynchburg, VA
Executive Medical Director Primary CareLynchburg, VA
MEDICAL DIRECTOR: CARE MANAGEMENT - Banner Health - Phoenix, ArizonaPhoenix, Arizona
See more at JAMA Career Center
Others Also Liked

1. Deaths spike 20% in U.S. during 4-month period
   Healio
2. Excess mortality from COVID-19 in NYC comparable to peak of 1918 flu pandemic
   Healio

1. Prevalence of diabetes, hypertension among COVID-19 patients likely lower than reported
   By Michael Monostra, Healio, 2020

Powered by




Trending

• Excess Deaths From COVID-19, Community Bereavement, and Restorative Justice for Communities of Color
  JAMA
  
  Opinion
  
  October 20, 2020
• Excess Deaths From COVID-19 and Other Causes, March-July 2020
  JAMA
  
  Research
  
  October 20, 2020
• Estimation of Excess Deaths From COVID-19 in the United States, March to May 2020
  JAMA Internal Medicine
  
  Research
  
  October 1, 2020

JAMA
JAMA Network
Help

Get the latest from JAMA
Sign Up
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

© 2020 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
Terms of Use| Privacy Policy| Accessibility Statement

Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue

Thanks Rubar. Great info that basically confirms the 400k deaths in one year with extreme social measures vs 40k with flu, says COVID is at least 10 times more deadly and could be substantially higher if we did not adjust behavior. Not to mention long haul and health care system overhaul. This certainly backs up actions various US states and national governments around the world have taken.

Even if we exclude humans in nursing homes, this virus is significantly more deadly.

Thanks to you and numbers for the science. Great news on therapeutics and vaccines will help get us back to some normalcy soon I hope.

 

[RUinFla]

Have dipped in and out of this thread but don't know whether the subject has been covered. Had a friend from my years as a volunteer guide at the National Zoo in Washington, DC email me about shark liver oil being used in vaccines. She said manufacturing an adequate supply of the Covid vaccine could result in millions of sharks being killed so their livers could be harvested. Moreover, an accompanying rise in the cost of shark liver oil would impel North Korean and Chinese fishermen, in particular, to kill as many sharks as they could find. Killing off the apex predator in an ecosystem has unfortunate consequences, as we found out when wolf populations were decimated. Restoration of wolves in some areas has successfully reversed the chain of ill effects caused by their elimination. Like a surplus of deer starving to death, and becoming a nuisance by invading gardens in towns in a desperate search for food.

 

[RUkrazy89]

They don’t work. LA has been wearing masks since forever. Cases are on the rise. If they worked, that wouldn’t be the case. In fact, the opposite would be true. Even a simpleton can understand that.

Well Caliknight and bac sy they don't work, I am sold. Throwing out all my masks as we speak.

 

[RU848789]

Excellent and important new paper from La Jolla Institute of Immunology by Shane Crotty's group, which has been the subject of a few posts by me and @UMRU and others over the last several months. Essentially, they followed over 180 recovered infected patients for 5-8 months, performing the most comprehensive assessment of ongoing immunological marker levels in patients, by profiling antibodies, B-cells, and T-cells in their immune systems over time.

They found durable responses for the vast majority of people and have postulated that immunity in these people could very well last for years and it's expected that immunity from vaccines would likely be similar - see the excerpt below from the Times article (the paper is in the 2nd link), especially the part in bold. This work builds on the work done by many others around the world in recent months (some of which is in the 3rd/4th links from old posts of mine).

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/health/coronavirus-immunity.html/??

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.15.383323v1.full.pdf

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/threads/florida-halts-football-program-covid.202128/post-4726680

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...es-interventions-and-more.198855/post-4650144

How long might immunity to the coronavirus last? Years, maybe even decades, according to a new study — the most hopeful answer yet to a question that has shadowed plans for widespread vaccination.

Eight months after infection, most people who have recovered still have enough immune cells to fend off the virus and prevent illness, the new data show. A slow rate of decline in the short term suggests, happily, that these cells may persist in the body for a very, very long time to come.

The research, published online, has not been peer-reviewed nor published in a scientific journal. But it is the most comprehensive and long-ranging study of immune memory to the coronavirus to date.

“That amount of memory would likely prevent the vast majority of people from getting hospitalized disease, severe disease, for many years,” said Shane Crotty, a virologist at the La Jolla Institute of Immunology who co-led the new study.

 

[tom1944]

Have dipped in and out of this thread but don't know whether the subject has been covered. Had a friend from my years as a volunteer guide at the National Zoo in Washington, DC email me about shark liver oil being used in vaccines. She said manufacturing an adequate supply of the Covid vaccine could result in millions of sharks being killed so their livers could be harvested. Moreover, an accompanying rise in the cost of shark liver oil would impel North Korean and Chinese fishermen, in particular, to kill as many sharks as they could find. Killing off the apex predator in an ecosystem has unfortunate consequences, as we found out when wolf populations were decimated. Restoration of wolves in some areas has successfully reversed the chain of ill effects caused by their elimination. Like a surplus of deer starving to death, and becoming a nuisance by invading gardens in towns in a desperate search for food.

I have a feeling the shark lobby will not be able to stop this one

 

[Knight Shift]

This is not being posted to be controversial. Dr. Jason Fung is a highly respected doctor. There seem to be some holes/issues with the way the study was conducted.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2029717#.X7SVO86fY4c.twitter

 

[King of S]

Excellent and important new paper from La Jolla Institute of Immunology by Shane Crotty's group, which has been the subject of a few posts by me and @UMRU and others over the last several months. Essentially, they followed over 180 recovered infected patients for 5-8 months, performing the most comprehensive assessment of ongoing immunological marker levels in patients, by profiling antibodies, B-cells, and T-cells in their immune systems over time.

They found durable responses for the vast majority of people and have postulated that immunity in these people could very well last for years and it's expected that immunity from vaccines would likely be similar - see the excerpt below from the Times article (the paper is in the 2nd link), especially the part in bold. This work builds on the work done by many others around the world in recent months (some of which is in the 3rd/4th links from old posts of mine).

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/17/health/coronavirus-immunity.html/??

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.15.383323v1.full.pdf

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/threads/florida-halts-football-program-covid.202128/post-4726680

https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...es-interventions-and-more.198855/post-4650144

How long might immunity to the coronavirus last? Years, maybe even decades, according to a new study — the most hopeful answer yet to a question that has shadowed plans for widespread vaccination.

Eight months after infection, most people who have recovered still have enough immune cells to fend off the virus and prevent illness, the new data show. A slow rate of decline in the short term suggests, happily, that these cells may persist in the body for a very, very long time to come.

The research, published online, has not been peer-reviewed nor published in a scientific journal. But it is the most comprehensive and long-ranging study of immune memory to the coronavirus to date.

“That amount of memory would likely prevent the vast majority of people from getting hospitalized disease, severe disease, for many years,” said Shane Crotty, a virologist at the La Jolla Institute of Immunology who co-led the new study.

Fantastic news RU848.... science moving the mark very quickly now. Pfizer’s final numbers are in and they’re better than the initial data.

 

[RUfubar]

This is not being posted to be controversial. Dr. Jason Fung is a highly respected doctor. There seem to be some holes/issues with the way the study was conducted.

View embedded media

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2029717#.X7SVO86fY4c.twitter

i saw this. really weak study and even admitted it in the discussion. I'm kind of surprised it was even printed. I don't think it it offers very much since those admitted holes are huge in this quasi study.

 

[Knight Shift]

i saw this. really weak study and even admitted it in the discussion. I'm kind of surprised it was even printed. I don't think it it offers very much since those admitted holes are huge in this quasi study.

I did not read the article closely, but saw that there were instances where masks were not worn, and it did not seem they monitored the recruits closely. Surprised NEJM published this. Studies like this will give ammo to people, unfortunately.

 

[GSGS]

They don’t work. LA has been wearing masks since forever. Cases are on the rise. If they worked, that wouldn’t be the case. In fact, the opposite would be true. Even a simpleton can understand that.

Well, if that's your criteria, the states where COVID is spiking the most now are the ones without mask mandates. Even a Trumpanzee should be able to understand that.

One can always count on Cali and bac for the most anecdotal, least scientific, analysis around.

 

[RUfubar]

I did not read the article closely, but saw that there were instances where masks were not worn, and it did not seem they monitored the recruits closely. Surprised NEJM published this. Studies like this will give ammo to people, unfortunately.

I was actually giggling because is it really surprising that young adults in camp with roommates somehow manage to spread virus around even though they're supposed to be on their best behavior, regimented and disciplined in terms of a semi -quarantine.
they probably missed the hookers that snuck in through the windows in the middle of the night.

 

[RUfubar]

Well, if that's your criteria, the states where COVID is spiking the most now are the ones without mask mandates. Even a Trumpanzee should be able to understand that.

One can always count on Cali and bac for the most anecdotal, least scientific, analysis around.

masks don't work? damn I've been torturing myself for no reason. how about condoms?
although they're kind of hard to breathe through.

 

[Knight Shift]

I was actually giggling because is it really surprising that young adults in camp with roommates somehow manage to spread virus around even though they're supposed to be on their best behavior, regimented and disciplined in terms of a semi -quarantine.
they probably missed the hookers that snuck in through the windows in the middle of the night.

Maybe it was the donuts.

 

[T2Kplus10]

More info/data on the Pfizer vaccine - looking good!

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/18/coronavirus-pfizer-vaccine-is-95percent-effective-plans-to-submit-to-fda-in-days.html

Pfizer and BioNTech said Wednesday that a final data analysis found their coronavirus vaccine was 95% effective in preventing Covid-19 and appeared to fend off severe disease.

The vaccine, called BNT162b2, becomes highly effective against the virus 28 days after the first dose, and its effectiveness was consistent across all ages, races and ethnicities, the drugmakers said. Additionally, the elderly, who are seen as at high risk of severe illness from Covid-19, saw vaccine effectiveness of more than 94%, the companies said.

“The final analysis underlines the results of the positive interim efficacy analysis announced on November 9,” BioNTech CEO Ugur Sahin said in a statement. “The data indicates that our vaccine ... is able to induce a high rate of protection against COVID-19 only 29 days after the first dose. In addition, the vaccine was observed to be well-tolerated in all age groups with mostly mild to moderate side effects, which may be due in part to the relatively low dose.”

The vaccine also appeared to prevent severe disease in volunteers. Nine of the 10 severe cases of Covid were in the placebo group in the phase three trial, the companies said. They also saw no “serious” safety concerns, with most adverse events resolving shortly after vaccination.

Pfizer’s shares jumped 3% in premarket trading, while BioNTech’s surged 6.2%.

The final analysis evaluated 170 confirmed Covid infections among the late-stage trial’s more than 43,000 participants. The companies said 162 cases of Covid were observed in the placebo group versus eight cases observed in the group that received its two-dose vaccine. That resulted in an estimated vaccine efficacy of 95%, they said.

 

[Yeah Baby]

Those who are mandating masks get caught on camera not wearing them. Indoors. With more than 10 people. No distancing.

I wear a mask because it cannot hurt and to protect others. I see everyone wearing masks and distancing outdoors minus the looting, rioting and 11/7 super spreader events when thousands of people were all on top of each other yelling, screaming, touching but I digress. Even with most of us wearing masks and socially distancing the numbers continue to rise at alarming rates.

Why? I know the answer.

 

[RUinFla]

I have a feeling the shark lobby will not be able to stop this one

The shark lobby, is it? Way to be dismissive, Tom. Obviates the need for a reasoned response.

 

[tom1944]

The shark lobby, is it? Way to be dismissive, Tom. Obviates the need for a reasoned response.

Not dismissive just realistic

If shark livers are needed for the vaccine there will be absolutely zero political will or support to say no let Covid continue we need to protect the sharks.
Hell we are at the point where puppies would be sacrificed.

 

[RU848789]

More info/data on the Pfizer vaccine - looking good!

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/18/coronavirus-pfizer-vaccine-is-95percent-effective-plans-to-submit-to-fda-in-days.html

Pfizer and BioNTech said Wednesday that a final data analysis found their coronavirus vaccine was 95% effective in preventing Covid-19 and appeared to fend off severe disease.

The vaccine, called BNT162b2, becomes highly effective against the virus 28 days after the first dose, and its effectiveness was consistent across all ages, races and ethnicities, the drugmakers said. Additionally, the elderly, who are seen as at high risk of severe illness from Covid-19, saw vaccine effectiveness of more than 94%, the companies said.

“The final analysis underlines the results of the positive interim efficacy analysis announced on November 9,” BioNTech CEO Ugur Sahin said in a statement. “The data indicates that our vaccine ... is able to induce a high rate of protection against COVID-19 only 29 days after the first dose. In addition, the vaccine was observed to be well-tolerated in all age groups with mostly mild to moderate side effects, which may be due in part to the relatively low dose.”

The vaccine also appeared to prevent severe disease in volunteers. Nine of the 10 severe cases of Covid were in the placebo group in the phase three trial, the companies said. They also saw no “serious” safety concerns, with most adverse events resolving shortly after vaccination.

Pfizer’s shares jumped 3% in premarket trading, while BioNTech’s surged 6.2%.

The final analysis evaluated 170 confirmed Covid infections among the late-stage trial’s more than 43,000 participants. The companies said 162 cases of Covid were observed in the placebo group versus eight cases observed in the group that received its two-dose vaccine. That resulted in an estimated vaccine efficacy of 95%, they said.

Yes, more great news. It's really worth highlighting that the vaccine was just as effective in those over 65 and in all races/ethnicities as in everyone else, as that has been a major concern. I would expect Moderna's results to be similar on the full dataset.

According to Endpoints, the FDA is planning on sharing all vaccine trial data submitted for the EUAs (emergency use authorizations), which will be filed for by both companies shortly - this level of transparency will be important for regulators, medical/public health experts and the public, with regard to inspiring confidence in getting these vaccines.

Endpoints also said the FDA is setting aside time on 12/8-12/10 to review data from both Pfizer and Moderna, presumably to make decisions on their EUAs - assuming that's the case, we should start to see vaccinations starting for front-line workers before Christmas.

https://endpts.com/covid-19-roundup...vaccine-triggers-quick-immune-response-study/

I'm hopeful the great results will move the needle so that maybe we'll see 60-70% get vaccinated rather than the 50-55% that have been saying they will and that level is important to achieving herd immunity (estimated to be in the 55-80% range).

Also, keep in mind that we've likely seen 15-25% of the population already infected (and now immune, as per my post last night), so not quite as many need to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity, although even infected/recovered people should get the vaccine to ensure protection against the virus.

 

[papachungus02]

I like it thanks for the article

 

[bac2therac]

Danish mask study finally drops...ouch