Discussions
Reply to: Dr. Erickson’s viral “COVID-19 Briefing” video is dangerously wrong Posted April 28, 2020
Reply to: Dr. Erickson’s viral “COVID-19 Briefing” video is dangerously wrong Posted April 28, 2020

I watched this video last night.  And I’m probably more educated than most.  Erikson largely was correct, and this media attack is character assassination. In the video, he clearly says he is extrapolating the data.  He comes out with a number that is 0.03%.  That number is absurd as a practical matter.  Any reasonable person would recognize it as absurd.  You cannot hang him out to dry for something that is completely unrealistic and unreasonable to believe.  Using his methodology, you would get a 0.8% for New York State, which is on par with the 0.5% rate they estimate.  So his methodology might actually have accuracy in estimating the deaths to date, which is of no practical use since we already count how many people die.  Yes, it was dumb and pointless for him to come up with this statistic.  It’s not malpractice, it’s not anything.  The reason he probably did it is because the 12% infected rate he got when testing is almost identical to the 13.9% infection rate that New York got when doing a randomized sample of people outdoors.  If one were to assume that the infection rate is similar across the board, which is not unreasonable to fathom, then you would get that 0.03% number.  And that’s exactly the type of pondering and playing with numbers an egg-head would do.  Obviously, there are other variables at play because the 0.03% number does not fit the other data from other places and is likely completely wrong. The article compares Erickson’s sampling bias as EXACTLY like sampling a communion to see how many Catholics there are in the whole population.  Really?  And you would get 12%?  Not something much closer to 100%?  That’s absurd.  This is a perfect example of media errors and mischaracterizations, right here in this very article.  His sampling bias is nothing at all comparable to such a ridiculously off-point example.  The best evidence we have prior to this showed the infection rate as HIGHER than 12%.  Erikson simply did not draw the conclusion that the infection rate is not uniform across the country.  I recall the other doctor clearly stating they were drawing no conclusions about other localities.  Erikson may have been attempting to push an agenda here, but there is nothing wrong with his data.  And there’s no technical foul with his conclusions, although the 0.03% is obviously an artefact that no reasonable person would believe and should not have been presented.  What’s a reasonable person?  Me.  Anyone with a brain.  Certainly all these jealous doctors, anxious to get their names in the papers and happy to criticize him. The two doctors also said staying indoors would damage people’s immune systems and doctors came out and said this is 100% not true.  But it is true, at least for some people.  What happens if you overuse antimicrobial spray in your nose?  You get a nose infection because you kill all the weak germs, allowing the bad ones to thrive.  Might not be bad enough to notice, I don’t know, but they studied it in a lab in a university in my state–the results are in.  People who are staying in their house for two months, religiously disinfecting everything and themselves, are going to kill off every weak microbe and allow the top 0.01% to thrive without competition.  That’s going to weaken their immune systems as they fight off trillions of only the hardiest, most well-fed germs your home has to offer and make those people targets for opportunistic infections when they go back into the real world.  The weakest of the weak are going to get some weird disease they normally wouldn’t get.  Probably never can trace any individual back to the root cause, but we know it can happen and the long-term stats will show a mild increase in weird disease deaths post-Covid.  They didn’t give you a dissertation on the subject because it wasn’t the point of their presentation.  Maybe they’re wrong, but the theory is sound.  Don’t believe me?  Wash your hands every 10 minutes for a month, except for sleeping.  Use the strongest anti-microbial soap.  See what starts growing on your hands. Prior to seeing this video, I noticed data sets that showed COVID deaths decreasing at certain time points.  Negative deaths.  In other words, people coming back to life.  The conclusion I drew was C-19 was being labeled as the cause of death and corrected later.  And I figured they weren’t correcting them all if they were making the thousands of mistakes I was noticing.  And in this video he flatly presents what I found on my own.  They are being told to write up people as C-19 victims even though they aren’t.  There’s a a lot of information in this video that is objectively true.  If you can’t look passed a stupid number here, an irrelevant comment there, then you’re brainwashed.  He’s not right about 0.03% death rate.  So what?  What’s that have to do with the fact that the best data is telling us the death rate is 0.5%, when last month all of you were hysterical over it being 3.4%?  Either it suddenly mutated into something 90% less deadly or all the people you believed in were wrong.  Why aren’t you impeaching them? Going to find a reason to disagree with the best data we have?  Even if our best data is wrong, a betting man, of which I am, would never bet the official number would end at 1% or higher, and would probably bet on it being lower than the current estimates.  You obviously want to stay locked down.  Why do you people attack and dismantle everything that says this lockdown is no good?  And where’s your science to back it up?

No activity yet.
Reply to: Dr. Erickson’s viral “COVID-19 Briefing” video is dangerously wrong Posted April 28, 2020
Reply to: Dr. Erickson’s viral “COVID-19 Briefing” video is dangerously wrong Posted April 28, 2020

I watched this video last night.  And I’m probably more educated than most.  Erikson largely was correct, and this media attack is character assassination. In the video, he clearly says he is extrapolating the data.  He comes out with a number that is 0.03%.  That number is absurd as a practical matter.  Any reasonable person would recognize it as absurd.  You cannot hang him out to dry for something that is completely unrealistic and unreasonable to believe.  Using his methodology, you would get a 0.8% for New York State, which is on par with the 0.5% rate they estimate.  So his methodology might actually have accuracy in estimating the deaths to date, which is of no practical use since we already count how many people die.  Yes, it was dumb and pointless for him to come up with this statistic.  It’s not malpractice, it’s not anything.  The reason he probably did it is because the 12% infected rate he got when testing is almost identical to the 13.9% infection rate that New York got when doing a randomized sample of people outdoors.  If one were to assume that the infection rate is similar across the board, which is not unreasonable to fathom, then you would get that 0.03% number.  And that’s exactly the type of pondering and playing with numbers an egg-head would do.  Obviously, there are other variables at play because the 0.03% number does not fit the other data from other places and is likely completely wrong. The article compares Erickson’s sampling bias as EXACTLY like sampling a communion to see how many Catholics there are in the whole population.  Really?  And you would get 12%?  Not something much closer to 100%?  That’s absurd.  This is a perfect example of media errors and mischaracterizations, right here in this very article.  His sampling bias is nothing at all comparable to such a ridiculously off-point example.  The best evidence we have prior to this showed the infection rate as HIGHER than 12%.  Erikson simply did not draw the conclusion that the infection rate is not uniform across the country.  I recall the other doctor clearly stating they were drawing no conclusions about other localities.  Erikson may have been attempting to push an agenda here, but there is nothing wrong with his data.  And there’s no technical foul with his conclusions, although the 0.03% is obviously an artefact that no reasonable person would believe and should not have been presented.  What’s a reasonable person?  Me.  Anyone with a brain.  Certainly all these jealous doctors, anxious to get their names in the papers and happy to criticize him. The two doctors also said staying indoors would damage people’s immune systems and doctors came out and said this is 100% not true.  But it is true, at least for some people.  What happens if you overuse antimicrobial spray in your nose?  You get a nose infection because you kill all the weak germs, allowing the bad ones to thrive.  Might not be bad enough to notice, I don’t know, but they studied it in a lab in a university in my state–the results are in.  People who are staying in their house for two months, religiously disinfecting everything and themselves, are going to kill off every weak microbe and allow the top 0.01% to thrive without competition.  That’s going to weaken their immune systems as they fight off trillions of only the hardiest, most well-fed germs your home has to offer and make those people targets for opportunistic infections when they go back into the real world.  The weakest of the weak are going to get some weird disease they normally wouldn’t get.  Probably never can trace any individual back to the root cause, but we know it can happen and the long-term stats will show a mild increase in weird disease deaths post-Covid.  They didn’t give you a dissertation on the subject because it wasn’t the point of their presentation.  Maybe they’re wrong, but the theory is sound.  Don’t believe me?  Wash your hands every 10 minutes for a month, except for sleeping.  Use the strongest anti-microbial soap.  See what starts growing on your hands. Prior to seeing this video, I noticed data sets that showed COVID deaths decreasing at certain time points.  Negative deaths.  In other words, people coming back to life.  The conclusion I drew was C-19 was being labeled as the cause of death and corrected later.  And I figured they weren’t correcting them all if they were making the thousands of mistakes I was noticing.  And in this video he flatly presents what I found on my own.  They are being told to write up people as C-19 victims even though they aren’t.  There’s a a lot of information in this video that is objectively true.  If you can’t look passed a stupid number here, an irrelevant comment there, then you’re brainwashed.  He’s not right about 0.03% death rate.  So what?  What’s that have to do with the fact that the best data is telling us the death rate is 0.5%, when last month all of you were hysterical over it being 3.4%?  Either it suddenly mutated into something 90% less deadly or all the people you believed in were wrong.  Why aren’t you impeaching them? Going to find a reason to disagree with the best data we have?  Even if our best data is wrong, a betting man, of which I am, would never bet the official number would end at 1% or higher, and would probably bet on it being lower than the current estimates.  You obviously want to stay locked down.  Why do you people attack and dismantle everything that says this lockdown is no good?  And where’s your science to back it up?