[Donna]

Da fuck? Really? :?: :?: :?: I'm surprised I didn't know/realize this. I feel like I follow that kind of thing well enough to remember.

Anyway, that said, could it not be argued that, that previous inversion was a fluke, given that there wasn't a recession in late 2019 or early 2020. it's really only until the unforeseen virus that people started to think a recession is imminent.

In other words, if this virus never happened, do you think we would be going into a recession?

The prognosis of the inversion usually works within a time frame of about 18-21 months (that is, 18-21 months from the start of the sustained inversion), so even without the virus we were likely looking at a recession in 2021. Which shouldn't be surprising if you consider that we were in the longest bull market run ever and the only thing preventing the pooled asset bubble from bursting were low interest rates/QE (which will now include the Fed purchasing ETFs to keep up with the logic of the current cycle).

[Rancid]

The prognosis of the inversion usually works within a time frame of about 18-21 months (that is, 18-21 months from the start of the sustained inversion), so even without the virus we were likely looking at a recession in 2021. Which shouldn't be surprising if you consider that we were in the longest bull market run ever and the only thing preventing the pooled asset bubble from bursting were low interest rates/QE (which will now include the Fed purchasing ETFs to keep up with the logic of the current cycle).

You know, for a dirty communist, you seem to know a lot about capitalism.


I get it, know your enemy.

[QatzelOk]

So that is a “no”. You cannot show that anyone has died or will die. You just have vague predictions.

Sivad is unable to provide that because the authorities aren't measuring it, while they're providing a minute-by-minute deathcount and infection count which, by the way, is NOT being balanced with information on the number of dead and infected in a normal influenza run.

Sivad or anyone with a wide vision of our complex reality realizes that isolation and economic decline are deadly to many people. That you are currently unable to perceive this is a result of your own narrow-mindedness on this issue. If this is because you are in panic-mode, then it's understandable, since the media has been in panic mode for months.

Your fervent support for the current neoliberal and globalist status quo is noted, though.

I ignored the rest of your post since it was both irrelevant and wrong.

You can't accuse me of these things. I'm just concerned about the logic of information processing.

[Donna]

You know, for a dirty communist, you seem to know a lot about capitalism.


I get it, know your enemy.

[Sivad]

I don't think people will die.

People will definitely die. Stress kills and nothing stresses people out more than losing their jobs and facing destitution. Also, when people stress they turn to all manner of bad habits. They drink more, they smoke more, they abuse drugs, they over-eat, they get depressed and sit around the house and don't get enough exercise. When people lose their jobs they also lose their healthcare so they can't afford doctors or medicine. Stressed out and unemployed means lots of domestic violence that otherwise wouldn't be happening. I could go on for ever about all the ways economic collapses kill people but do I really have to? Does anyone really doubt that mass unemployment has a negative impact on public health?

"suicide carried off many, drink and the devil took the rest."

[Sivad]

Sivad is unable to provide that

I can provide it:

People in counties with worse economies are more likely to die from heart disease
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 115241.htm

Another fallout from the Great Recession: Fewer people took their blood pressure and diabetes medications
https://www.statnews.com/2018/03/12/gre ... -pressure/

Financial crisis caused 500,000 extra cancer deaths, according to Lancet study
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/0 ... ding-to-l/

because the authorities aren't measuring it,

They measure it, just not very well or very often:

A lack of research
Hard data about the recession’s impact can be hard to find; the Great Recession and its impact on health and health care systems accounted for only 92 published papers in the last two years. Among them is one published by Jessica Jones-Smith, an epidemiologist at the University of Washington’s School of Public Health. In 2016, she and her colleagues published a paper finding that children were at a higher risk of gaining weight during the recession if they lived in counties where unemployment rose.
https://www.statnews.com/2018/03/12/gre ... -pressure/

[Sivad]

Great Recession a Factor in Suicide Rate Jump Among Middle-Aged

Several studies have linked the economic downturn of 2007-2009 to higher suicide rates, especially for middle aged people and men, Dr. Hempstead and Dr. Julie A. Phillips of the Institute for Health, Health Care Policy and Aging Research in New Brunswick, New Jersey, note in their report.
https://www.naccme.com/article/great-re ... aged-21516

[foxdemon]

You know, for a dirty communist, you seem to know a lot about capitalism.


I get it, know your enemy.

Donna is a commie, but should we call her a ‘dirty commie’. She actually seems to have a heart, so that makes her one of those commies that historically got an ice pick through the back of the head.

On the other hand, one opens oneself to manipulation if one is sympathetic to a commie. Never underestimate the power of indoctrination.

[mod note: We expect members to be polite to each other; calling someone "it" clearly isn't, unless they've explicitly asked to be called that, which I don't think I've heard of, and is not the case here. Prosthetic Conscience]

[Donna]

Sivad is correct that there is an uptick in suicides during downturns, which is tragic, but numerically it is incomparable to the amount of people being killed by COVID-19 (and that's with the shut-downs and the current pro-active attempt to control the pandemic).

[Sivad]

Funny how China just implemented the biggest quarantine the world has ever seen, and their economy isn't up in flames. Same with European countries.

Virus had 'eye-popping' impact on China's economy: Beige Book
After surveying thousands of Chinese firms, China Beige Book International (CBB) suggested that “a 10-11% GDP contraction in the first quarter is not unreasonable.”

Indicators in the survey “continued to deteriorate even into mid-March when most firms were re-opening and supposedly ‘back to work,’” a statement from the U.S.-based consultancy said.

Private-sector analysts are slashing their growth forecasts for China to lows not seen since the Cultural Revolution ended in 1976 as the coronavirus epidemic led to widespread travel curbs and halted production in the world’s second-largest economy. The respiratory disease has killed more than 3,200 people and infected over 81,000 on the Chinese mainland.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-chin ... SKBN21A3R9


EU fears: Bloc on brink of worst-ever recession as VDL breaks rules to save economy
THE European Union fears its about to be hit by its largest-ever recession as the bloc prepares itself for the economic fallout caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/12 ... yen-update

[Sivad]

Sivad is correct that there is an uptick in suicides during downturns, which is tragic, but numerically it is incomparable to the amount of people being killed by COVID-19

Well if you're just dishonestly looking at suicides you might have a point, but when you look at the cumulative effects on all areas of public health then it dwarves the coronavirus. And that's just physical health, that doesn't include the horrific social and psychological impacts of economic collapse. The cure is far worse than the disease in this case.

[Godstud]

The cure is far worse than the disease in this case.

No. It's not. You ignore facts in favour of some strange narrative where it's all some sort of conspiracy. You pad your BS with pseudoscience or 1/2 truths, and even the sources you present are opinion pieces with a great deal of speculation, or you go straight Youtube for fun videos made by bonehead morons.

[Sivad]

experts like Richard Schabas, Ontario's former chief medical officer, worry that draconian measures that stoke fear in the population do more harm than good.

Recession also kills

"Recessions kill people, in fact will probably kill more people than this virus does," he told CBC News host Michael Serapio last week.

Here in the wealth and safety of Canada it may be hard to fathom, but in a globally integrated economy a few dollars less a month can mean life or death to people struggling for food and medicine. That's easier to comprehend when you think that the World Health Organization estimates about six million children a year die preventable deaths, usually associated with poverty.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/covid- ... -1.5464012

[Donna]

Well if you're just dishonestly looking at suicides you might have a point, but when you look at the cumulative effects on all areas of public health then it dwarves the coronavirus. And that's just physical health, that doesn't include the horrific social and psychological impacts of economic collapse. The cure is far worse than the disease in this case.

But if we're going to play with moral calculus between a bad economy and a pandemic, how do you get around the sanctity of human life? As bad as financial, social and psychological ruin is, we're talking about literal human lives here.

[Godstud]

Not taking the steps to reduce the pandemic will create a far larger problem, as hospitals can't keep up with the demand and people die of completely preventable diseases or injuries, due to shortages in treatment.

I'd like to know what fantasy world Sivad lives in, where massive infection rates, and deaths, don't also cause an economic collapse that he pretends he wants to avoid.

Right now, @Sivad you're just trolling as an "Agent of Chaos".

[Sivad]

But if we're going to play with moral calculus between a bad economy and a pandemic, how do you get around the sanctity of human life? As bad as financial, social and psychological ruin is, we're talking about literal human lives here.

Well setting aside the fact that you're dishonestly ignoring the studies I posted saying that economic crises do indeed kill lots of people, the idea that the [timely] deaths of a few million old sick people is like the greatest tragedy imaginable and must be averted at all costs, is just idiotic. There are far worse tragedies that come from economic collapse. How many women in the developing world will be forced into prostitution? How many children will be forced into prostitution? How many birth defects from severe malnutrition? Your morality is as superficial and bankrupt as your politics.

And the irony of a gulagist who says Stalin is misunderstood appealing to the "sanctity of human life" is just off the charts.

[Donna]

Well setting aside the fact that you're dishonestly ignoring the studies I posted saying that economic crises do indeed kill lots of people...

How many people do they kill?

[Sivad]

How many people do they kill?

Who really knows? How many people in the developing world who are economically teetering on the brink of absolute poverty fall off the edge into severe malnutrition, disease, and abject immiseration every time the global economy even slightly dips?

You might want to figure that out before applying your ignorant moral calculus to extremely complicated and complex issues.

[Donna]

Who really knows? How many people in the developing world who are economically teetering on the brink of absolute poverty fall off the edge into severe malnutrition, disease, and abject immiseration every time the global economy even slightly dips?

You might want to figure that out before applying your ignorant moral calculus to extremely complicated and complex issues.

So you don't know. Okay.

[Sivad]

Updated: 22nd March: Estimating COVID-19 Case Fatality Rates (CFR) and Infection Rate Fatality (IFR)

The Infection Rate Fatality (IFR) differs from the CFR in that aims to estimate the fatality rate in all those with infection: the detected disease (cases) and those with an undetected disease (asymptomatic and not tested group). if tested, this group would be counted as infected and at least temporarily be immune.

Our current best assumption, as of the 22nd March, is the IFR is approximate 0.20% (95% CI, 0.17 to 0.25).*

In the elderly, co-morbidities have a significant impact on the CFR: those with ≥ 3 comorbidities are at much higher risk, particularly those with cardiovascular conditions. Modelling the data on the prevalence of comorbidities is essential to understand the CFR and IFR by age. In those without pre-existing health conditions, and over 70, the data is reassuring that the IFR will likely not be above 1%. The prevalence of comorbidities is highly age-dependent and is higher in socially deprived.

How do we arrive at this estimated IFR figure?

The current COVID outbreak seems to be following previous pandemics in that initial CFRs start high and then trend downward. In Wuhan, for instance, the CFR has gone down from 17% in the initial phase to near 1% in the late stage. Current testing strategies are not capturing everybody. At least 50% of those on the Diamond Princess was. asymptomatic, who usually wouldn’t get a test.

In South Korea, considerable numbers who tested positive were also asymptomatics. Asymptomatic people and mild cases are likely driving the rapid worldwide spread.

Early IFR rates are subject to selection bias as more severe cases are tested – generally those in the hospital settings or those with more severe symptoms. Mortality in children seems to be near zero (unlike flu) which will drive down the IFR significantly. In Swine flu, the IFR was fivefold less than the lowest estimate in the 1st ten weeks (0.1%)

Therefore, to estimate the IFR, we used the estimate from Germany’s current data 22nd March (93 deaths 23129) cases); CFR 0.40% (95% CI, 0.33% to 0.49%) and halved this for the IFR of 0.20% (95% CI, 0.17% to 0.25%) based on the assumption that half the cases go undetected by testing and none of this group dies. Our assumptions, however, do not account for some exceptional cases, as in Italy, where the population is older, smoking rates are higher, comorbidities may be higher, and antibiotic resistance is the highest in Europe, which all can act to increase the CFR and the subsequent IFR.

Given the estimated mortality in over 80’s is higher (CFR near 15%); there is considerable uncertainty over the IFR rates in this group. It is currently not clear what the excess mortality is in this group.

It is essential to understand whether the elderly are dying with or from the disease (see the Sarah Newy report). It is also not clear if the presence of other circulating influenza illnesses acts to increase the CFR (testing for co-pathogens is not occurring)
https://www.cebm.net/global-covid-19-ca ... ity-rates/

Jason Oke
MSc, DPhil

SENIOR STATISTICIAN

I have been a statistician at the Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences since 2007. In the last five years, my research has been mainly on the diagnosis of cancer in primary care, overdiagnosis and overtreatment. I am interested in methods for evaluating monitoring and screening programmes, test evaluation and diagnostic accuracy.

I am the study statistician for the SCAN pathway and IDEAL (Artificial Intelligence and Big Data for Early Lung Cancer Diagnosis). I am a statistical reviewer for Emergency Medicine, Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology and Colorectal Disease Journal. I have recently taken on a role as editorial board member for Nature Scientific Reports.

I am currently co-supervising two part-time DPhil students; Ms Ranin Soliman who is studying "Time Trends of Childhood Cancer Outcomes and Resource Use in Egypt" and Dr Hendrijks Dijkstra who is studying "Factors predicting cam morphology in athletes".

I am the co-coordinator of two online modules for the MSc in Evidence Based Health Care; Statistical Computing with R and Stata and the Introduction to Statistics for Health Care Researchers and deputy coordinator for the Year 1 & 2 medical statistics teaching of the Oxford pre-clinical (First BM). With Thomas Fanshawe, I run a one-day workshop on Statistical methods for diagnostic accuracy in medical research.


Carl Heneghan
BM, BCH, MA, MRCGP, DPhil

PROFESSOR OF EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE

Director of CEBM & Programs in EBHC
Editor in Chief, BMJ EBM
NHS Urgent Care GP
NIHR Senior Investigator

Carl Heneghan is a Clinical Epidemiologist with expertise in Evidence-Based Medicine, Synthesising evidence and informing decision for better healthcare.

He is Director of the NIHR SPCR Evidence Synthesis Working Group a collaboration of nine primary care departments He has published 95 Systematic reviews, and authored high impact work including the Tamiflu systematic reviews.

Hei s a frontline urgent care GP.

His work also includes investigating drug and devices, advising governments on regulatory evidence and working extensively with the public and the media.

He has investigated the evidence for sports drinks, IVF 'Add-on' treatments, metal-hips, screening, surgical mesh, medical devices and hormone pregnancy tests. He has worked in the field of diagnosis for over 15 years and is one of the leads for the Preventing Overdiagnosis Conference.

He is a clinical advisor to two UK All Parliamentary Party Group on Surgical Mesh and Hormone Pregnancy Tests, and A founder of the AllTrials campaign twice voted one of the top 100 NHS clinical leaders by the HSJ. In 2018 he was awarded NIHR Senior Investigator status