Fascinating video from some doctors on COVID stats and recommendations

[WarriorDad]

I believe that there’s a better chance that herd immunity will work than we’ll have a vaccine in 12-18 months. Maybe treatments will be more effective by then but by then I believe more of the vulnerable will become infected, too.

I believe that a 12-18 month lockdown means a depression. That’s more than mere economic pain.

I don’t know if I’m right, you’re right or if we’re both wrong. It doesn’t matter. All that matters is that whatever strategy we employ end up working. That’s my only wish. I’m sure yours too.

Finally, I believe it’s unfair for you to insinuate I’m advocating $$ over lives.

Really good answer.  This isn’t money over lives, but if people want to ignore the damage a destroyed economy also does to lives when they do not have jobs or money coming in is surprising and naive.  If the mortality rates by the Stanford doctor are correct, this discussion has to happen.

Sweden is in the news because they are trying something different and not an island nation dissimilar to most other nations.  They are comparable in geography, lifestyle, and demographics and newsworthy as a result.

  It seems obvious.

[Pakuni]

Finally, I believe it’s unfair for you to insinuate I’m advocating $$ over lives.

I apologize if I've misunderstood or misstated your comments.  Sincerely.

Side note ... I don't believe there's been serious suggestion by anyone here of a 12- to 18-month lockdown, so that seems a bit of a straw man.

[Lennys Tap]

I apologize if I've misunderstood or misstated your comments.  Sincerely.

Side note ... I don't believe there's been serious suggestion by anyone here of a 12- to 18-month lockdown, so that seems a bit of a straw man.

Thanks, Pakuni. Much appreciated.

 I thought the best estimate for a vaccine (if we get one) was 12-18 months and I further thought that folks here had proposed a lockdown until we had one. I apologize if this was a misrepresentation.

[forgetful]

If the mortality rates by the Stanford doctor are correct, this discussion has to happen.

The mortality rates by the Stanford doctors are wrong. So no need for the discussion?

Here is an analysis of why the Stanford data is fundamentally incorrect, likely deliberately so.

https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/04/19/fatal-flaws-in-stanford-study-of-coronavirus-prevalence/

Not to mention they lied to all the participants in saying the tests were FDA approved, and would guarantee whether they had the virus or not. That is a major violation of research ethics and a violation of human experimentation.

[Eldon]

Wow.  I never thought I would see an Andrew Gelman blog post on Scoop.

There's a first time for everything I guess.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Really good answer.  This isn’t money over lives, but if people want to ignore the damage a destroyed economy also does to lives when they do not have jobs or money coming in is surprising and naive.  If the mortality rates by the Stanford doctor are correct, this discussion has to happen.

Sweden is in the news because they are trying something different and not an island nation dissimilar to most other nations.  They are comparable in geography, lifestyle, and demographics and newsworthy as a result.

  It seems obvious.

Only if you cherry pick data.  Very Chicos.

Anyway, the discussion  doesn't need to happen.  It's happened.  States will be opening back up on their own timelines.  End of May at the latest it seems.

[jesmu84]

Really good answer.  This isn’t money over lives, but if people want to ignore the damage a destroyed economy also does to lives when they do not have jobs or money coming in is surprising and naive.  If the mortality rates by the Stanford doctor are correct, this discussion has to happen.

Sweden is in the news because they are trying something different and not an island nation dissimilar to most other nations.  They are comparable in geography, lifestyle, and demographics and newsworthy as a result.

  It seems obvious.

Intellectual dishonesty

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Intellectual dishonesty

quelle surprise

[WarriorDad]

Exactly.  Another appeal to authority... except they're not authoritative... but you know, they're doctors, so we should give them the same authority as epidemiologists...  because... reasons.

Appeal to authority?  Isn't that done here routinely?  When someone attaches an article to say they nailed it, isn't that an appeal to authority to back up their opinion on a matter?  You don't seem troubled by it when you do it, or others here.  Member Forgetful appealing to authority because he appeals to Andrew Gelman?

I found those doctors interesting, and also the Stanford doctor (Atlas) whom I copied.  Last evening there were countless doctors in various forums saying similar things with other doctors opposing them. Healthy dialogue is good.

Everyone here is frustrated.  Your constant name calling, bullying and other attacks are not needed.  I'm sorry you are stressed out, but many of us are. 

[forgetful]

Appeal to authority?  Isn't that done here routinely?  When someone attaches an article to say they nailed it, isn't that an appeal to authority to back up their opinion on a matter?  You don't seem troubled by it when you do it, or others here.  Member Forgetful appealing to authority because he appeals to Andrew Gelman?

I'm not appealing to authority, or appealing to Andrew Gelman.

I'm appealing to basic statistical theory and experimental practice. Something the Stanford guys absolutely ignored. I'm appealing to their flawed data, tests, and analysis.

[WarriorDad]

I'm not appealing to authority, or appealing to Andrew Gelman.

I'm appealing to basic statistical theory and experimental practice. Something the Stanford guys absolutely ignored. I'm appealing to their flawed data, tests, and analysis.

You used a link to back up your claim, no different than I did.   The Stanford researchers have promised to release additional information (this week?) to address Gelman's and other critiques.  When they do can that be linked or will this endless bickering and calling people names continue?

[forgetful]

You used a link to back up your claim, no different than I did.   The Stanford researchers have promised to release additional information (this week?) to address Gelman's and other critiques.  When they do can that be linked or will this endless bickering and calling people names continue?

Depends if they remotely follow proper experimental protocol, and statistical methods, or not. They have proven through this and past research that they are more interested in political aims, than they are in research integrity. Frankly, I don't see how they deal with the clear and obvious biases, and violations of research ethics, in regards to their subject recruitment.

But data is data. I look at all data the same way.

[Pakuni]

Appeal to authority?  Isn't that done here routinely?  When someone attaches an article to say they nailed it, isn't that an appeal to authority to back up their opinion on a matter?  You don't seem troubled by it when you do it, or others here.  Member Forgetful appealing to authority because he appeals to Andrew Gelman?

This isn't what's meant by appeal to authority.
And expertise in the field is wholly relevant when weighing credibility in matters of science and statistics.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

You used a link to back up your claim, no different than I did.   

More intellectual dishonesty. SOP.

[WarriorDad]

Intellectual dishonesty

Help make me a better person the .  Why do you think it is intellectually dishonest?  There have been comments here that truly are dishonest ( “blood on their hands”), but how is my statement dishonest? 

[WarriorDad]

Appeal to authority.

500 economists...

This has been mentioned multiple times now.  Can someone explain what 500 economists means?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

This has been mentioned multiple times now.  Can someone explain what 500 economists means?

[Hards Alumni]

Appeal to authority?  Isn't that done here routinely?  When someone attaches an article to say they nailed it, isn't that an appeal to authority to back up their opinion on a matter?  You don't seem troubled by it when you do it, or others here.  Member Forgetful appealing to authority because he appeals to Andrew Gelman?

I found those doctors interesting, and also the Stanford doctor (Atlas) whom I copied.  Last evening there were countless doctors in various forums saying similar things with other doctors opposing them. Healthy dialogue is good.

Everyone here is frustrated.  Your constant name calling, bullying and other attacks are not needed.  I'm sorry you are stressed out, but many of us are.

Yeah, you don't understand what I was saying.  Read up.

Interesting final comment.  I have been the one that has been bullying people?  Where exactly? 

Honestly, I'm not stressed out.  Maybe you're doing a little big of projection here.

Or you're just holding some sort of grudge... for some reason, "Mike".

Wait, is that name calling? 

[Warriors4ever]

https://www.acep.org/corona/COVID-19/covid-19-articles/acep-aaem-joint-statement-on-physician-misinformation/?fbclid=IwAR1xpyVAR9WYacsdt6I06Au5zgZQZujGB-AXTHDxpS4-WwCizb4ZUVWUhr0

Pushback from an organization of emergency room physicians questioning their methodology, conclusions, and bias.

[Pakuni]

And the reason the videos have gone blank above is that YouTube removed them.

[tower912]

Too bad.   I was going to watch it again as a satirical piece.

[GooooMarquette]

Thanks, Pakuni. Much appreciated.

 I thought the best estimate for a vaccine (if we get one) was 12-18 months and I further thought that folks here had proposed a lockdown until we had one. I apologize if this was a misrepresentation.

I for one think the lockdown should only continue until states meet the criteria to begin the three-phase reopening set forth (and then subsequently ignored) by Trump. Among other things, this requires states to have declining trajectory of infections for 14 days, adequate resources to test all symptomatic individuals, and adequate resources for contact tracing for anyone who tests positive.

I am not sure which if any states meet these criteria, but doubt it would take 12-18 months.

[WarriorDad]

And the reason the videos have gone blank above is that YouTube removed them.

You Tube should not be censoring, but they do.  It has been happening in social media for several years now.  Wholly UnAmerican and not appropriate for the debate we all should be having.

It is good that others are pushing back, that is where dialogue stems from.  Have the debate, do not censor.

Related.  Last night Dr. Stephen Smith, Infectious Disease expert, called the Virginia study on hydroxychoriquine a sham.  Is he right?  I don't know, but there sure seem to be many people that are gleeful if it doesn't work or point to examples to prove they are right.

"I've no idea why [University of Virginia School of Medicine opthamology professor Dr. Jayakrishna Ambati] delved into this study, which isn't a study. It's a sham," Smith said. "I can't believe anyone took this seriously. There's not one dosage listed, cumulative or daily, of hydroxychloriquine or anthromicin. And people call this a study."

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

You Tube should not be censoring, but they do.  It has been happening in social media for several years now.  Wholly UnAmerican and not appropriate for the debate we all should be having.

It is good that others are pushing back, that is where dialogue stems from.  Have the debate, do not censor.

It's not a debate if they facts they use are innaccurate.  It's misinformation.

[Pakuni]

You Tube should not be censoring, but they do.  It has been happening in social media for several years now.  Wholly UnAmerican and not appropriate for the debate we all should be having.

YouTube has no obligation to allow people to use its private platform to spread misinformation, especially misinformation that's potentially dangerous. That;s the kind of thing that gets companies sued.
Since when is it "UnAmerican" for a private enterprise to choose how its service is used? Funny take from a guy who believes the NFL was within its rights to punish anthem kneelers.

Related.

Not remotely related.
Also, you didn't mention that Dr. Stephen Smith is a Fox News guest who's claimed that hydroxychloroquine would end the pandemic.
A very objective source.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/dr-stephen-smith-on-effectiveness-of-hydroxychloroquine-with-coronavirus-symptoms-beginning-of-the-end-of-the-pandemic