Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Corona Virus


Ja  Rhule
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

No. They think we're under-counting. Likely by a lot.

Exactly, that’s my point. Even if someone believes that hospitals are over counting deaths, that number wouldn’t be enough to overcome the huge numbers of people who died at home.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the flip side of that, there are a ton of asymptomatic/undiagnosed mild cases cases so the death rate might still be about the same, which is higher than the flu, but not high enough to cripple the economy for years. Those who are high risk should stay at home. Otherwise, folks have to get things going again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Wolfcop said:

On the flip side of that, there are a ton of asymptomatic/undiagnosed mild cases cases so the death rate might still be about the same, which is higher than the flu, but not high enough to cripple the economy for years. Those who are high risk should stay at home. Otherwise, folks have to get things going again. 

That horse has left the barn.  The economy's is going to be crippled for years. About 40%of our population has at least one condition that puts them at high risk.  About half of them will totally change their lives until there is a vaccine or proven treatment.  Any one who thinks the economy is going back to the good old days are living in la la land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, CaliPanthers said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/denver.cbslocal.com/2020/05/14/coronavirus-montezuma-county-coroner-alcohol-poisoning-covid-death/amp/

Within a week, local Montezuma County Coroner George Deavers determined Yellow had died of acute alcohol poisoning, his blood alcohol measured at .55, nearly twice the lethal limit.

“It was almost double what the minimum lethal amount was in the state”, said Deavers, during an interview with CBS4.

But Deavers said that before he even signed the death certificate, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment had already categorized Yellow’s death as being due to COVID-19 and it was tabulated that way on the state’s website.

“I can see no reason for this”, said Deavers.

Yellow’s death is the latest in Colorado raising eyebrows over the way the CDPHE is reclassifying deaths that runs contrary to what doctors and coroners initially ruled.

Last month, a CBS4 Investigation revealed the state health department reclassified three deaths at a Centennial nursing home as COVID-19 deaths, despite the fact attending physicians ruled all three were not related to coronavirus.

  Yep. Its just a little flu folks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, CaliPanthers said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/denver.cbslocal.com/2020/05/14/coronavirus-montezuma-county-coroner-alcohol-poisoning-covid-death/amp/

Within a week, local Montezuma County Coroner George Deavers determined Yellow had died of acute alcohol poisoning, his blood alcohol measured at .55, nearly twice the lethal limit.

“It was almost double what the minimum lethal amount was in the state”, said Deavers, during an interview with CBS4.

But Deavers said that before he even signed the death certificate, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment had already categorized Yellow’s death as being due to COVID-19 and it was tabulated that way on the state’s website.

“I can see no reason for this”, said Deavers.

Yellow’s death is the latest in Colorado raising eyebrows over the way the CDPHE is reclassifying deaths that runs contrary to what doctors and coroners initially ruled.

Last month, a CBS4 Investigation revealed the state health department reclassified three deaths at a Centennial nursing home as COVID-19 deaths, despite the fact attending physicians ruled all three were not related to coronavirus.

And this case would be representative of and show what? So how many of these 100.000 deaths are over reporting? 

The over or under reporting is very easily proven by comparing the death toll 2020 with a combination of let's say, the last five years and see if there is any spikes in dead people. 

Wait, didn't NY Times already do this kind of experiment... 

Conclusion,  under reporting... 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Tbe said:

Exactly, that’s my point. Even if someone believes that hospitals are over counting deaths, that number wouldn’t be enough to overcome the huge numbers of people who died at home.

People dying at home were largely assumed to have COVID-19 if autopsy's were foregone.  It was easier at the height of the pandemic in places like NYC just to code deaths COVID-19 and move on.  Sure a sizable portion of them were deaths due to the virus, but not in every case.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Wolfcop said:

On the flip side of that, there are a ton of asymptomatic/undiagnosed mild cases cases so the death rate might still be about the same, which is higher than the flu, but not high enough to cripple the economy for years. Those who are high risk should stay at home. Otherwise, folks have to get things going again. 

Where do you shop for groceries? A specific store, not just a chain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Colorado has actually been one of the more transparent states in terms of numbers. We're actually dividing our numbers between deaths "caused by COVID" and deaths "with COVID" that weren't necessarily a direct result of COVID.

Any comparison against normal death toll? To see if there is excessive number of deaths compared to other years?

And does any state provide statistics regarding the day of death.

When I have tried to find information, all I find is hmm..  "today's report is x new deaths" but it doesn't say when the people actually died.

 

Sorry for directing this to you, but if Colorado have good numbers maybe I will take a look at whatever website they use to publish this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, kass said:

And does any state provide statistics regarding the day of death.

When I have tried to find information, all I find is hmm..  "today's report is x new deaths" but it doesn't say when the people actually died.

Found it. And yes, good statistics. Even death date. And no covid deaths where some of my relatives live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kass said:

And this case would be representative of and show what? So how many of these 100.000 deaths are over reporting? 

The over or under reporting is very easily proven by comparing the death toll 2020 with a combination of let's say, the last five years and see if there is any spikes in dead people. 

Wait, didn't NY Times already do this kind of experiment... 

Conclusion,  under reporting... 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html

 

It's a good idea, but it's not apples to apples.  Go back and look at how New York was turning away people who went tot he hospital, and how the shutdown of other types of access to medicine has led to deaths not directly COVID.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Drafting a WR in the 1st only guarantees one of T-Mac, Coker, or the new draft pick has zero chance of still being on the roster 4 years from now because they can’t all be paid at the same time. Which is why a WR in the 1st makes no sense, if we do that, I’d be pissed if we don’t also trade Coker this offseason, and I have zero interest in trading him, so……… We know T-Mac is that dude, so unless the team has serious concerns about Coker taking the next step, WR makes so sense to me in the 1st
    • We read each other and we bring together influences from a variety of sources--that is what makes this time of year great.  However, when you realize that the Panthers have talked to three (3) WRs expected to be there around #19, it must give us pause. We all knew about Cooper (who has been heavily mocked to the Jets at #16) and Concepcion (deemed to be the perfect Z WR based on his skill set).  Then the other day, the Panthers quietly brought in another tall WR that seems to be less than a good fit at first glance. First, a glance at the top 2 WRs the Panthers have shown interest in: Cooper (projected to Jets at 16--could possibly go as early as 9) Concepcion (considered to be a perfect fit for the Z WR (leaving Coker in the slot and TMac at X) has one major issue that has plagued the Panthers (see Legette, Xavier, TMac) in the area of drops.  Coker, on the other hand has never dropped anything in his entire life--including "in" or "by."  He can't even eavesdrop.   So, does that stat about Concepcion bother them?  It does me.  XL dropped 14% of his catchable balls as a rookie.  Last year, he found new ways to screw up, such as not knowing the boundares or lateralling to Rico for a big loss.  Yes, TMac was ROY and was terrific, but he had 8 drops, catching just under 60% of targets. Top NFL WRs are in the 70%-80% range--which is good news--it means that TMac can improve.  He caught 70 passes and dropped 8, meaning that his drop rate was about 10%.  If you are counting, Denzel Boston is another first-round WR whose stock may have dropped a bit because he did not run a 40 during his pro day.  However, I see him as the #3 or #4 WR in this draft.     Most people feel that Denzel Boston is in the TMac mold--a tall X.  Many of the same criticisms (about separation and speed) face Boston now. Although he is primarily viewed as a physical X (split end) receiver due to his 6'4", 212-pound frame, Boston has a weakness that makes him less valuable as the X but more valuable as a Z. Boston's ability to get off a jam at the LOS has been questioned--something an X does nearly every play. While his size and contested-catch ability make him a prototypical X, scouts and analysts note he has the versatility to move across the formation, including taking snaps in the Z or as a big slot, often helping to create mismatches. This would make him interchangeable with Coker.  Even if Legette does not come around, the Panthers would have a three-headed hydra at WR.  For much of last season, the Panthers had TMac, a goofy XL, and Versatility: Beyond being an X receiver, he is considered capable of playing Z or in the slot, allowing for movement across the formation. Physicality: With his size and strength, he can play on the outside, making him a strong red-zone target. Role Projection: While he primarily played on the boundary, his profile fits as a versatile receiver who can align in multiple spots to exploit matchups.  His 6-foot-4 height and 209-pound weight are ideal for an outside receiver who can play both X and Z positions at the next level.   NFL Combine write-up:  Two-year starter with elite ball skills that should supersede athletic/speed limitations. A Puka Nacua comparison might feel strong, but like Nacua, Boston enters the draft with speed/separation concerns and outstanding competitive toughness. Boston gets off the line with good burst and maintains his top speed throughout the route. He could have issues beating press, but releases can also be schemed. He’s very skilled when it comes to winning jump balls and contested throws. Boston also knows how to win in the red zone. Acclimating to NFL competition could take a year, but Boston has the makeup to become a productive possession target with above-average red-zone value.   The Panthers have looked at three Z WRs who will be first-rounders in all likelihood.  They have a proven track record of bringing in first-round picks.  The tea leaves are strong in this case.   here is Greg Cosell talking to the Bills analysts.  What he says about Boston (compares to TMac) is interesting (4:45).  https://www.buffalobills.com/video/greg-cosell-breaks-down-wr-draft-class-buffalo-bills Screen Shot:  No share available. "I don't think you have to just line him up inside (slot).  I think you can play him outside (X)."  That comment suggests he can play X, slot, or Z.  He then compares KC Concepcion vs. Boston--very different WRs.  In my view, Boston is more versatile.  Boston has excellent hands and he wins contested balls.  Red Zone--giving TMac someone on the other side of the field with the sure-handed Coker inside.  What Cosell says later (about Hurst, actually, but it applies to Concepcion): "You can teach guys to catch a ball."   He talks about Concepcion, Boston, and Cooper in succession.  I get the feeling he is less impressed with Cooper than others are because he questions the competition--based on the Indiana system vs. zone etc.  I would also say that any WR who has a good WR on the other side of the field probably gets less defensive attention. I should add that this also reflects poorly on XL, but I have said he would be a late bloomer.  I had no idea how much he did not know about football.  We shall see, but can you imaging how potent we'd be in 4 WR sets if he comes around?  How do you cover that?  (OT people are biting their lips right now) THE DRAFT It sure looks as though the Panthers are looking seriously at WR (the Z spot specifically) in the draft.  Can you see any other position that has garnered this much attention for potential day 1 players?  I cannot.   I am concerned about the OT situation, don't get me wrong, but Morgan is going to think, "I have a starter and I brought in a swing T (Forsythe).  Moton is a real concern.  We may look at RT later--and I know how others feel about it.  We could re-sign BC and he would be available after a month or two....I dunno. Less than 2 weeks to go--just thought I would take a look at WR because it seems, based on available "evidence," that a WR will be our pick....again.  
×
×
  • Create New...