Looks like a lot more suicides than expected to me. Sad, really.

Certainly many of those deaths are due to coronavirus; however, my fear is that many of those deaths might also be related to not seeking treatment for life threatening conditions. In our ERs, we aren't just seeing a reduction in BS complaints, we are seeing a reduction in heart attacks, heat failure, COPD exacerbations, etc. Its all very concerning that people are potentially dying at home due to waiting too long to come in out of fear of contracting coronavirus.

these are the tradeoffs so many have been warning of. focusing on a single variable (COVID death rate) in all aspects of the public policy debate has certainly cost lives otherwise saved, and this will worsen given ongoing lockdown and associated fear, hospital distress (for non COVID care efforts currently in severe financial distress), loss of healthcare insurance, depression, etc.

i would not have wanted to confront the decisions our leaders have faced in the past two months, but the absence of any balancing variables against COVID death rate is glaring and, in this age of complex data analytics, pretty unacceptable.

Can't say how many times we've been told - even on this very forum - to stay away from the hospital. So we're staying away.

Bingo. Stay home no matter what. Even if you need help, unfortunately.

I don't believe that anywhere near 2,000 folks in New York City in one month died because they chose to stay home. When you consider how many people are normally admitted to hospitals with life threatening conditions and still die, you'd need an immense number of people with deadly conditions not seeking proper help.

I agree with the doc above that that's a mix of uncounted Covid-19 deaths and other deaths.

If you're going to push hard on this causing other deaths, you also have to consider whether this is saving some other deaths, too. Are traffic deaths down? Are deaths from flu and other contagious diseases down?

Yeah, if it's due to people staying home and not seeking treatment, we'd likely be seeing that elsewhere in the country. If the rise is specific to NY only, I'd say it's more due to the virus. Also need to look at ER type visits in NY compared to the rest of the country. NY would have to be way below the average of the rest of the country to say that's contributing.

Last I saw, deaths for the country were way down due to people doing less activities that would injure them.

The hospitals, at least in the middle of the city, are completely overwhelmed, according to a good friend of mine who is there with the army. He said that it is a horrific situation.

Now, I understand that is very isolated, but in the city itself they are having some serious issues.

Numbers By Josh Katz and Margot Sanger-Katz

2 New York Times journalists who are probably liberal arts majors. I'll wait for the analysis from actual experts.

Also, that graph is extremely misleading. They take 31 days of deaths and put it in a chart that has daily death totals because they either dont know how to plot data or they are being intentionally misleading.

Gumby said:

---

Numbers By Josh Katz and Margot Sanger-Katz

2 New York Times journalists who are probably liberal arts majors. I'll wait for the analysis from actual experts.

---

Click on their names. Josh Katz has a master's degree in statistics and Margot Sanger-Katz is a cum laude Yale graduate who completed a Columbia fellowship in economics reporting. I'm sure they can make an accurate line graph.

If you don't trust the numbers, the source material is all available in the article and its footnotes.

Quote:

---

Also, that graph is extremely misleading. They take 31 days of deaths and put it in a chart that has daily death totals because they either dont know how to plot data or they are being intentionally misleading.

---

What are you talking about? They literally put "Month ending on April 4" on the graph.

If the hospitals in Manhattan are overrun, why does The Javits Center's 1000 beds only have 50 patients?

TXAggie2011 said:

---

I don't believe that anywhere near 2,000 folks in New York City in one month died because they chose to stay home. When you consider how many people are normally admitted to hospitals with life threatening conditions and still die, you'd need an immense number of people with deadly conditions not seeking proper help.

I agree with the doc above that that's a mix of uncounted Covid-19 deaths and other deaths.

If you're going to push hard on this causing other deaths, you also have to consider whether this is saving some other deaths, too. Are traffic deaths down? Are deaths from flu and other contagious diseases down?

---

i get the point you are trying to make, but the variables that should be balanced in any analysis in public health policy should be those that involve directive measures.

people choosing to take a risk to drive a car and car deaths declining are not a result of 'directive' measures, they are choices a free people make and that are not (at least until now) granted privileges of a benevolent government overseeing subjects as opposed to free citizens.

our financial sector and other sectors of the economy incorporate untold variables in decision process models of tremendous complexity.

for this public health crisis, we have incorporated only one - COVID death rates.

in a city the size of NYC, 2000 deaths in a month resulting from voluntary self denial of healthcare is entirely feasible - some would have died anyway, but many would have been saved.

single variable objective functions have consequences for ALL other variables.

we are endowed with unalienable rights in the USA - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. we've (at least temporarily) sacrificed two of these three in an effort to enable one. that decision is by no means looking wise at this stage.

regardless, for this situation, the die is cast and we are in for a long, grim year.

we must do better in the future.

California Ag 90 said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

I don't believe that anywhere near 2,000 folks in New York City in one month died because they chose to stay home. When you consider how many people are normally admitted to hospitals with life threatening conditions and still die, you'd need an immense number of people with deadly conditions not seeking proper help.

I agree with the doc above that that's a mix of uncounted Covid-19 deaths and other deaths.

If you're going to push hard on this causing other deaths, you also have to consider whether this is saving some other deaths, too. Are traffic deaths down? Are deaths from flu and other contagious diseases down?

---

i get the point you are trying to make, but the variables that should be balanced in any analysis in public health policy should be those that involve directive measures.

people choosing to take a risk to drive a car and car deaths declining are not a result of 'directive' measures, they are choices a free people make and that are not (at least until now) granted privileges of a benevolent government overseeing subjects as opposed to free citizens.

our financial sector and other sectors of the economy incorporate untold variables in decision process models of tremendous complexity.

for this public health crisis, we have incorporated only one - COVID death rates.

in a city the size of NYC, 2000 deaths in a month resulting from voluntary self denial of healthcare is entirely feasible - some would have died anyway, but many would have been saved.

single variable objective functions have consequences for ALL other variables.

we are endowed with unalienable rights in the USA - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. we've (at least temporarily) sacrificed two of these three in an effort to enable one. that decision is by no means looking wise at this stage.

regardless, for this situation, the die is cast and we are in for a long, grim year.

we must do better in the future.

---

Whether you agree or disagree, that was well put. You should write speeches.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52196815

TLDR: medic in NYC worked 12 cardiac arrests in one day, all died, all strongly suspected to be covid 19 positive and none were tested or counted in the 594 that died that day in NY.

He said a typical week would see 2 or 3 of those cardiac calls.

PJYoung said:

---

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52196815

TLDR: medic in NYC worked 12 cardiac arrests in one day, all died, all strongly suspected to be covid 19 positive and none were tested or counted in the 594 that died that day in NY.

He said a typical week would see 2 or 3 of those cardiac calls.

---

remind me to avoid that medic.

Dr.HeadCase said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Gumby said:

---

Numbers By Josh Katz and Margot Sanger-Katz

2 New York Times journalists who are probably liberal arts majors. I'll wait for the analysis from actual experts.

---

Click on their names. Josh Katz has a master's degree in statistics and Margot Sanger-Katz is a cum laude Yale graduate who completed a Columbia fellowship in economics reporting. I'm sure they can make an accurate line graph.

If you don't trust the numbers, the source material is all available in the article and its footnotes.

Quote:

---

Also, that graph is extremely misleading. They take 31 days of deaths and put it in a chart that has daily death totals because they either dont know how to plot data or they are being intentionally misleading.

---

What are you talking about? They literally put "Month ending on April 4" on the graph.

---

Careful. You risk upsetting the mind meld of forum 16ers bleeding over into this forum.

---

Yes, they all group think over there and are intolerant of opinions they don't agree with











We definitely don't want them coming over here with intolerable opinions