A. Aron - Member - The Prepared

Reply to: Dr. Erickson’s viral “COVID-19 Briefing” video is dangerously wrong Posted April 29, 2020

It doesn’t matter that symptoms are not specific – you had to be sick enough to even get the test – so only the worst cases were tested. Then there were people like me who got sick, had an underlying condition but didn’t want to risk getting infected if it wasn’t that – so I stayed home and didn’t get tested. The same fear caused by the media throwing out huge mortality rates scared many people away.

Reply to: Dr. Erickson’s viral “COVID-19 Briefing” video is dangerously wrong Posted April 29, 2020

He’s correct. This does not count for the asymptomatic or mild cases. I know people who were told they could not get a test because they were not sick enough. This seems to be fairly common. Now that there is antibody testing we should be able to find out more. At least in my state testing was very selective. Yesterday was the first time the state has made an announcement that anyone with symptoms can get tested. So still, not anyone. My daughter’s friend got an antibody test as part of a new study and she was positive – completely asymptomatic.

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

It’s very odd. People don’t want to look at the actual data and ask questions. Are we afraid that we have done all this for nothing? I think our initial response was right but as we have gathered more information this turns out not to be what the academic modelers predicted. It’s a cause for relief and we need to adapt our policies to a level that is inline with the actual data. There are numerous studies, even non-serologic, that show the number of asymptomatic infected could be 50% – Iceland. The studies from every country (that I have read) skew towards age and co-morbidities. It’s not that this isn’t serious, but shouldn’t people at least look at the data and ask questions? Also why do the reporters in the video, from the beginning, seem to be on the attack? Why is everyone focused on proving the new data wrong when any way you consider the lethality the original models were wrong. it seems like group think, or the lemming syndrome. Stay at home does not seem to be working in Illinois. I am complying with it but I see many who are not. In an effort to be transparent I invented “the lemming syndrome.”

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

Thank you! I hope you enjoy your walks- we need some sun here.

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

I’m all for caution. I just don’t think the lockdowns are without consequence. I don’t want people to die. I’m not advocating for 100% return to normal. I think we need social distancing guidelines that can be maintained over a longer timeline. To accuse me of being a monster for caring about the people who are suffering as a result of the lockdowns is not right. It’s also okay that you don’t agree with me.

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

First, know that I am someone who is at risk due to health issues beyond my control. I do not want the responsibility of these people being out of work and starving to save people like me. Your numbers are off it’s not 2 out of 100. It’s between 1-2 out of 1000. Apparently you are not unemployed or standing in the food line. It lacks compassion to dismiss concerns for these people.

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

That statement assumes they wouldn’t be if they went back to work. There is no scenario that shows a majority of them would have severe cases and/or die.

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

Tell that to the 26M unemployed and the people standing in line 18 hours for food. Do you think they view it as being a little bit “over-cautious.” This may be worse than the flu but it’s nowhere near the 3.8% mortality rate provided by The WHO.

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

The population of New York City is 8.3M. There have been 12287 deaths =0.142%

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

He is extrapolating his actual data onto a larger population. This is more accurate than modeling with assumed factors and numbers that have not come to fruition.

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

In every case the original models have not been accurate. The death rate is much lower. 0.1 or 0.2 does not invalidate the argument.

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

There is no science to back up quarantining healthy people, that’s why they cannot provide it. The original models were wrong no matter how you spin this.

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

These doctors are right on. There are three types of fatality rates. Crude Fatality Rate, Case Fatality Rate , and Infection Fatality Rate. Crude fatality rate is the total number of deaths/ total number of that population – these numbers are currently actually well below .1%. The infection fatality rate cannot be found right now but it is the total total # of deaths/total # of infected (we don’t know the total number of infected),we know that it is a much higher number than currently reported. The case fatality rate (CFR) is the number of reported deaths / number of reported cases . The CFR is what’s being widely reported in the media and is a dangerously misleading number – because it’s missing all the people who have not been tested, but has to include all cases. In many states people who had mild symptoms were not permitted tests. Even an asymptomatic case is a case that would have to go into these numbers to get a true CFR. These doctors are extrapolating from their actual numbers and public data. Their numbers are much more accurate than theoretical models. We needed the theoretical models in the beginning, now we have actual data. Why are people choosing to ignore the actual data? If you don’t believe what they are saying check the numbers. I live in Illinois so let’s look at that as an example. According to the publicly available data the population of Illinois is 12.67 million there are 45,883 reported cases and 1983 reported deaths. The crude fatality rate for Illinois is 0.02%, the case fatality rate (based on only reported cases) is 4.32% . Since we don’t know the actual number of cases we cannot derive the IFR which is what other people are confusing with the CFR and what the models were trying to predict. Anyway you look at the data the IFR will not be anywhere close to the forecasts. These doctors are using their data and extrapolating to apply to populations which paints a more accurate picture of the true mortality rate.