Rupert Friend Aimee Mullins Wedding, Norwood Under 18 Results, Ann Ward Net Worth, How To Pronounce Prime, Barn Owls, How To Watch Lfa 84, Lauren Souness Wikipedia, Overwatch Game, "/>

stanford student death coronavirus

This is so annoying. If you think that it’s “shameful” of me to point this out, then you’re just shooting the messenger. >>> I’m not saying that we should adopt death penalty for drug dealing. I was told on Twitter by someone whose bio seemed appropriate that validating an antibody test precisely enough to do a serosurvey requires using pre-COVID serum samples from patients that had a comparable incidence of other viral URIs in the preceding period, including the non-novel coronaviruses, because those antibodies can be cross-reactive. if the drug precursors come from a different country. We making efforts to understand them as consumers and patients. Jeez—I just spent 3 hours writing this post. All rights reserved. Nowhere do they suggest that 75% of the population (245 million people) have been infected and asymptomatic. Hi Costa, Surely you should adjust for sensitivity/specificity first, then re-weight. Given that the City’s ~1/2 million richest people all seem to be in the Hamptons, the Berkshires, etc. There is no smoking in jail but upon release, the first thing many released inmates seek is bumming a smoke from someone or looking for a place that sells cigarettes. All market data delayed 20 minutes. Hmmmm. The false positives and false negatives in this example don’t cancel each other out, and one thing that annoyed me in the above-linked paper is when they wrote, “On the other hand, lower sensitivity, which has been raised as a concern with point-of-care test kits, would imply that the population prevalence would be even higher.” This kinda sounds reasonable but it’s not the right way to put it here given the numbers involved. They say, “we re-weighted our sample by zip code, sex, and race/ethnicity,” but “re-weighed . So the fifty positive results would correspond to 45-49 real infections out of the 3300 tested. I agree, and it’s even worse than that. Even then I miss nuances. Thanks for the link. To the best of my knowledge, you are correct that the cross-reactivity problem is real and these “false positives” can be real in the sense of the immune system providing resistance. I think it’s clear that the results of the study WAY overestimate true infection rate. He’s lost 100% of his credibility with me. We have to keep the infection rate low so critically ill patients can get top notch care, not just “the standard protocol”. Data availability. I believe they did test everyone on Diamond Princess, and it’s been 13 deaths out if 700 cases. I think it’s fairly likely that real world false negatives with the PCR test would be dominated not by some methodological issue but viral RNA just flat out not being present in the sample. Would one not see if there are other community level markers to confirm or at least intelligently support such sweeping conclusions that such a large population even if mildly symptomatic were also in number so medically silent? ^^^And he is going to be a in MD? But I agree with Jeff that there’s a problem when so many people (including the rather stat-geeky types who frequent this blog) are quick to reject out of hand any possibility that half or more of the population of NYC have a current or past COVID-19 infection. There was a "strong uptick" in fatal overdoses in August 2019, according to the county District Attorney's Narcotics Unit. The use of FB ads also explains the under-sampling of older people, as fewer people who are 65+ are even on the platform or login regularly. I was thinking about this a little more and I think the model is not exactly right. Several of the deaths had been linked to fake pills that are made to look like 30-milligram oxycodone prescription pills but contain fentanyl, the county said. According to this serosurvey, Stanford researchers estimated the actual numbers of cases be 50-85 times higher than what the county has announced. Note that I can’t include any of the reweighting since the study authors didn’t publish that data. There was no safeguard it appears to ensure veracity of findings through first conducting careful review of methods and practices. Exposure to even amounts the size of crumbs can cause overdose or death, according to a health advisory issued by the Santa Clara County Public Health Department in September. Let me again emphasize that “not statistically significant” is not the same thing as “no effect.” What I’m saying in the above post is that the information in the above-linked article does not provide strong evidence that the rate of people in Santa Clara county exposed by that date was as high as claimed. Yet these authors did not get in front of their analysis being used in the popular media for extrapolating national infection rates. Week 14 2020 was 49,770 deaths. (The San Mateo County District Attorney's office on Monday sentenced a drug dealer in a fentanyl overdose case to three years in county jail and over three years of mandatory court supervision. Or do we also need to somehow account for test sensitivity? The fifteenth author is a masters student in epidemiology and clinical research. Basically, did they apply all the conditions in their lab that were present in the 3200 diverse field samples? Nothing will prevent the smugglers to continue their business. In other words, right now the code has: num_community_positive ~ binomial(num_community, (fp_rate*(1 – prevalence) + (tp_rate*prevalence))); but I think the correct computation (this isn’t valid Stan code) would be: num_community_positive ~ binomial(num_community*prevalence, tp_rate) + binomial(num_community*(1-prevalence), fp_rate); And I don’t *think* those are equivalent? Let me put it another way. Perhaps I worry about optics too much, but I’m bringing this up now because I don’t want to get in a situation where it looks like they’re complying with all our internet-nerd demands and we’re still not satisfied. Sponsored content If we estimate that only those who we’re sick enough to go to the hospital got tested and use the estimated hospitalization rate the would mean there were actually about 5000 infections in a county of 1.9 million people. It looks like they may have used the same figures for specificity and sensitivity that they had used in the “second scenario” for the Santa Clara study. The OP is not the first to make this critique, I saw it in a nature article and elsewhere.Just people repeating the same thing. “5. What would change? But yes, those resources exist, but do not produce comparable figures. The extreme case is the post by economist Tyler Cowen who was trashing the entire field of epidemiology, in part based on a paper that was written by . It is in the 5th percentile for weeks between 2015 and 2020. But the school said there is no threat to the public. Level 2: take a virus sample, mix it with putative antibodies from A’s blood, then try to infect lung tissue. m brother died from alcohol, take my word, its the HEAVIEST and dying from it is brutal) But because it's legal we are expected to learn how to drink. All rights reserved. When we read a number like 20% or 50% or 80% or any other specific rate of asymptomatic infections, that is someone’s speculation. If the kids can find the dealers easily enough, then the police can too. NOBODY KNOWS THE PROPORTION OF INFECTED PEOPLE WHO ARE ASYMPTOMITIC. Simple MRP won’t work here as it will only adjust the selected estimates by demographic categories, i.e., we know the estimate conditional on utility obtained, but not estimate marginal of utility obtained. You would have done much better driving into neighborhoods and knocking on random doors, people are home these days. These tests are not worth anything, or have very little use,” Schwan told reporters on a conference call. I’m not outraged, just maybe a little disappointed. The study was reported in the news as that the county “Santa Clara county has had 50 to 85 times more cases than we knew about, Stanford estimates.” It does seem plausible that lots more people have been exposed than have been tested for the disease, as so few tests are being done. ^^^Agreed. One of my favorite topics and one that a former President of Yale, Kingman Brewster, commented on when we were attending a symposium at Yale Divinity. I volunteered on this study and talked with hundreds of the participants, at least 200 and possibly as many as 400.

Rupert Friend Aimee Mullins Wedding, Norwood Under 18 Results, Ann Ward Net Worth, How To Pronounce Prime, Barn Owls, How To Watch Lfa 84, Lauren Souness Wikipedia, Overwatch Game,