Run away from no-mask people

Status
Not open for further replies.

jobo

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
9,762
Reaction score
1,508
Location
Manchester UK
You can't argue with the tangible outcomes. There is a lot of statistical data showing us a predictable cause and effect between certain behaviors and the ebb and flow of infection rates and deaths. So, the rate may be accurate, but you're right in that it's higher in some demographics and lower in others. As you narrow the focus onto subsets of the overall set, the rates will change based on unique characteristics of the subset.

To put things into perspective, we're seeing things play out as expected among the current administration's inner circle. With Rudy Giuliani's hospitalization, we've seen over 50 (53, according to Forbe's) members of the Trump inner circle who tested positive for COVID. Of those, we know that several, including the President, were hospitalized, and that at least one died from the disease. Statistically, this is a microcosm of what is going on throughout the country. So, we have about 10% hospitalization, and 2% death rate. While members of the administration seemed little bothered by the untimely death of Herman Cain, I think his death was predictable, was the result of carelessness, and was entirely avoidable.

Also of interest, when talking about mitigation strategies such as wearing a mask, social distancing, etc, over 70% of the members of Congress who have tested positive for COVID are GOP, which is also statistically predictable based on their behaviors.

As I said before, we know what's causing the spread, and we know how to prevent it. It's just a matter of dealing with the toddler's who are selfish, ignorant, and unreasonable.

Edit: Just to be clear, everything we're seeing with those who have become infected is in line with what we're seeing on a larger scale among everyone who is infected. What is controllable is how many folks are becoming infected. So, within the microcosm of the Trump inner circle, those who are infected range from about 90% with mild or minimal symptoms, 10% or so with more severe symptoms, including a need for hospitalization, and 2% who actually died.

What is controllable is how many are infected, and we can see that a much higher percentage of republicans are testing positive because of their behaviors, which means more will be hospitalized and more will die needlessly.
could you post this data you cla8m you i have, ive asked before but you just oist nonsence and then another claim saying there is data

in particular, this data that shows a causation vetween behavours and the ibfection rate, nb not correlation, causation
 

jobo

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
9,762
Reaction score
1,508
Location
Manchester UK
in other news in the uk,the death rate from flu and associated conditions exceeded the covid deaths last week
 

jobo

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
9,762
Reaction score
1,508
Location
Manchester UK
This is an incredibly crass, selfish, and arrogant post. But like I have said before, you are consistent.
And yes, I realize you have me on ignore and do not see this post; but everyone else does.
And you missed a decimal on the stats. But I am certain you already know this.
i think he has me on ignore as well, either that ir he is igboribg me manually, he likes to rant with out interruption by facts
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
Here's something from that link you posted? The claim came from a meme. No one actually looked at the numbers? Then they post this "Because if it's a straightforward, garden-variety pneumonia that a person is admitted to the hospital for if they're Medicare typically, the diagnosis-related group lump sum payment would be $5,000." You can't compare a Pneumonia diagnosis with a Covid-19 diagnosis. The tests aren't the same, the care isn't the same, and risk to the care takers and the other patients in the hospital aren't the same." Pneumonia is not the same as Covid-19 They are two different things. So why would it be $5000 for Covid-19? It wouldn't. One would be more than the other because one requires more resources than the other to treat and diagnose.

Okay I guess? So what is your point in parsing out that part of the article? The "claim" is from USA Today; what you mean by it being a meme I have no clue. It does appear to be the Highlight article if that is what you mean.

Like I said that is just one of countless articles related to the point, I just grabbed the one that was easiest at the time since I was already working.

And you conveniently left the most poignant part of the article out where it explains; "But if it's COVID-19 pneumonia, then it's $13,000, and if that COVID-19 pneumonia patient ends up on a ventilator, it goes up to $39,000." It really helps to read the whole think.

You honestly do not get this?
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
28,843
Reaction score
9,725
Location
Hendersonville, NC
of course its generalizable, taking in to account that some ossues like being old increase the chances, i clearly said, i have a 1, in a 100,000 chance, not everybody did, but, im a random person ,there are another 70 million random people in this country, so its much the same for most people
No, that's not how statistics work.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
28,843
Reaction score
9,725
Location
Hendersonville, NC
yes we do, otherwise its a meaningless number

if a product claim it will reduce my chance of a heart attack by 30% that sounds really impresive, but inless we know ehat the chances are if me havibg a heart attack with out the product it means nothing at all, as my chances of having a heart attack are neglable, then thats a 30%decrease on an infintesmal number

if you want to say wearibg a madk reduces my chance of getting the virus,by 30% then its beholdent on you to know what my chances are with out it. you cant calulate the former unless you kbow the latter
We don't need to know how many people are infected to understand how many it has killed or hospitalized. The number that are infected but don't fit those two groups don't change anything about those two groups, as a % of the total population. (would only change what % of the infected - not the total population - make it to those two groups).

You are now mixing statistics AND confusing my comment. The 30% was one number I saw, and I said it wasn't a clear number. But you know you're trying to confuse the issue rather than discuss it. If you have an actual point or question, I'm happy to address them. Otherwise, I'm not interested in your attempts to obfusccate.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
28,843
Reaction score
9,725
Location
Hendersonville, NC
strawman, the death toll in this coubtry is unaccepable high, but that arises for a lack of planning,, poor impkimentation and out right neglect,

my wearibg ir not wearing mqsk would have no bearing on reducing that,, in fact the bulk of the deaths were in care homes in the first wave, that were just abanded by govenment, at the time we were beibg told not to wear a mask and as i wasnt wandering aimlessly round care homes with ir with iyt a mask,, non of those are down to me .

what they were doibg was readmitting residents from hospital, with out any tests or protection and thus killing people by the 10s, of thousands
Ah, gotcha. So science doesn't matter. You're just making conclusions from tiny bits of experience, rather than looking at the large-group studies and reviews that contradict you. As expected.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
28,843
Reaction score
9,725
Location
Hendersonville, NC
Fair enough. But we are on a MA forum; pretty much everything said could be claimed as anecdotal is you wish.
Do you not agree that hospitals/doctors are getting incentives for Covid cases? Here is just one of countless sources: Fact check: Medicare pays hospitals more money for COVID-19 patientsFact check: Medicare pays hospitals more money for COVID-19 patients
So yea, 'proving it' is not rocket science. People seeing it for what it is just takes good old common sense.

Who said anything about a conspiracy? Certainly not me since it appears they are playing within the rules that have been afforded them by our government. Pretty easy dots to connect there as well if you are willing to look for And see them.

But simple old fashioned capitalism at all cost? Yes, most definitely.
Medicare pays hospitals a tiny additional amount. That's just Medicare. Insurance and Medicaid do not.

So what you've "proved" is that there's a potential incentive for Medicare fraud. That doesn't prove it is happening. It doesn't take rocket science to see that distinction.

As for conspiracy, you're claiming the medical field - including administrators, doctors, and others - are committing large-scale fraud. That's rather the definition of conspiracy. Just because you'd do it, that doesn't mean doctors are doing it.
 

Gerry Seymour

MT Moderator
Staff member
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
28,843
Reaction score
9,725
Location
Hendersonville, NC
"Judges... score! 1 point, Gerry."

Just for the "zing" not for the content, y'all know I'm not "in" on masks as being an efficient method of doing much. Some studies make me want to swear by 'em, some seem to indicate they are dangerous to continue to wear (Legionnaire's disease making a big comeback), others show nominal numbers relating to protection. *shrug*

On a positive note, I had to visit my doc for a regular, and he mentioned that his research group is taking a hard human-study "loook" at a pharmaceutical which came out at the end of the original SARS based on research used to combat influenza and HIV... sort of a Tama-flu type of thing. SARS is/was a corona virus, as is COVID... so some smart guy wanted to give it a try. So far, he's said the results that his clinic group are finding are quite promising. Not a vaccine, but a post-infection treatment.

I thought that neat.
By the way, I went and looked for info on Legionnaire's risk being elevated, and all I could find was that the elevated risk at present is due to shut-down builldings (water sitting in pipes, etc.), with no mention of masks increasing the general risk. Can you point me to something?
 

mograph

Master of Arts
Joined
Apr 10, 2008
Messages
1,628
Reaction score
777
By the way, I went and looked for info on Legionnaire's risk being elevated, and all I could find was that the elevated risk at present is due to shut-down builldings (water sitting in pipes, etc.), with no mention of masks increasing the general risk. Can you point me to something?
There might be four reasons for an increase in Legionella diagnoses during the pandemic:
  1. shut-down buildings, as you describe, and
  2. misdiagnosis of COVID-19 as Legionella. (similar symptoms)
  3. increased exposure to Legionella contaminated hospital spaces
  4. COVID-19-exascerbated vulnerability to Legionella in some patients
... that inferred from the non-peer-reviewed After coronavirus, another hidden respiratory disease lurks in the buildings we left behind

But can you get Legionella from your mask? Only if you soak your mask in standing water from a source with Legionella bacteria present, I think. If you've just been breathing through your own mask, no. Ask the Experts - Legionella.org
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
21,236
Reaction score
6,750
Location
Covington, WA
Medicare pays hospitals a tiny additional amount. That's just Medicare. Insurance and Medicaid do not.

So what you've "proved" is that there's a potential incentive for Medicare fraud. That doesn't prove it is happening. It doesn't take rocket science to see that distinction.

As for conspiracy, you're claiming the medical field - including administrators, doctors, and others - are committing large-scale fraud. That's rather the definition of conspiracy. Just because you'd do it, that doesn't mean doctors are doing it.
Just a couple of things. First, the allegation that hospitals are committing large scale insurance fraud as a form of profiteering on this pandemic is ridiculous. Like other notable current events, there is simply no evidence that this is happening. I mean, beyond the suggestion that higher costs incurred by hospitals result in higher payouts from Medicare... which seems reasonable and not nefarious.

That said, Medicare is insurance. It is an entitlement program that is paid for in part by a Medicare payroll tax during one's working years, and then an optional coverage that includes a premium that is subsidized by the Federal Government. Medicare is managed federally, and not everyone qualifies. You have to have worked long enough to be insured, or be the spouse or dependent of someone who is insured.

Medicaid is also insurance. It is a needs based insurance program that is administered by each State and has unique rules for eligibility and coverage from State to State. There is some baseline for consistency mandated by the Federal Government, that most States adhere to in order to qualify for significant Federal funding that they would lose if they don't comply. Medicaid eligibility is based on financial need.

All that said, I think you're onto something in your final statement. What we've seen in the last four years is a lot of folks projecting their own lack of integrity on everyone else. I realize now that they just simply can't conceive that folks aren't grifting the system because it would never occur to them not to do so themselves. Everything they accuse others of being, they are themselves. It's a depressing thought, I know.
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
Medicare pays hospitals a tiny additional amount. That's just Medicare. Insurance and Medicaid do not.

So what you've "proved" is that there's a potential incentive for Medicare fraud. That doesn't prove it is happening. It doesn't take rocket science to see that distinction.

As for conspiracy, you're claiming the medical field - including administrators, doctors, and others - are committing large-scale fraud. That's rather the definition of conspiracy. Just because you'd do it, that doesn't mean doctors are doing it.
Just plain denial. Like I said before, and will say again, that was just the first article I came to. Anyone who chooses to even moderately search this stuff, and lives in some realm of reality, can find this stuff with ease. That you choose not to in on you.

What difference does it make that this article was about only one area of insurance and health care payment? Why would any thinking person not understand if this is being done in one area it would be fare across insurance/payment mediums? Are the amounts different? I would imagine most certainly worse for private insurance.

Shouldn't the bigger offense here be that since Medicare is paid from working people's payroll tax and federal income tax for all the non working people, isn't this this the height of double-dipping?
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
Just a couple of things. First, the allegation that hospitals are committing large scale insurance fraud as a form of profiteering on this pandemic is ridiculous. Like other notable current events, there is simply no evidence that this is happening. I mean, beyond the suggestion that higher costs incurred by hospitals result in higher payouts from Medicare... which seems reasonable and not nefarious.

That said, Medicare is insurance. It is an entitlement program that is paid for in part by a Medicare payroll tax during one's working years, and then an optional coverage that includes a premium that is subsidized by the Federal Government. Medicare is managed federally, and not everyone qualifies. You have to have worked long enough to be insured, or be the spouse or dependent of someone who is insured.

Medicaid is also insurance. It is a needs based insurance program that is administered by each State and has unique rules for eligibility and coverage from State to State. There is some baseline for consistency mandated by the Federal Government, that most States adhere to in order to qualify for significant Federal funding that they would lose if they don't comply. Medicaid eligibility is based on financial need.

All that said, I think you're onto something in your final statement. What we've seen in the last four years is a lot of folks projecting their own lack of integrity on everyone else. I realize now that they just simply can't conceive that folks aren't grifting the system because it would never occur to them not to do so themselves. Everything they accuse others of being, they are themselves. It's a depressing thought, I know.

A very cogent explanation of certain elements of Medicare. However, nothing you said has anything to do with this thread and everything to do with your typical agenda against conservatism or at least the last administration. Dude.
 

jobo

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
9,762
Reaction score
1,508
Location
Manchester UK
Ah, gotcha. So science doesn't matter. You're just making conclusions from tiny bits of experience, rather than looking at the large-group studies and reviews that contradict you. As expected.
science matters a great deal, you just havent got any to back up your numerous claims.

otherwise yous stop this silly dance and post it
 
Last edited:

jobo

Grandmaster
Joined
Apr 3, 2017
Messages
9,762
Reaction score
1,508
Location
Manchester UK
We don't need to know how many people are infected to understand how many it has killed or hospitalized. The number that are infected but don't fit those two groups don't change anything about those two groups, as a % of the total population. (would only change what % of the infected - not the total population - make it to those two groups).

You are now mixing statistics AND confusing my comment. The 30% was one number I saw, and I said it wasn't a clear number. But you know you're trying to confuse the issue rather than discuss it. If you have an actual point or question, I'm happy to address them. Otherwise, I'm not interested in your attempts to obfusccate.
we need to know what ny risk of catchibg the virus is before you can say a mask reduces it by 30%

its not me thats obfusccating,
tou have abandand the 30% claim and changed the topic completly

so, a question

if you dont kbow what my risk of catching the virus is, how can you say a mask reduces that by any% youve now elected to make up for the purpose of this discusion
 

WaterGal

Master of Arts
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
1,789
Reaction score
620
Medicare pays hospitals a tiny additional amount. That's just Medicare. Insurance and Medicaid do not.

So what you've "proved" is that there's a potential incentive for Medicare fraud. That doesn't prove it is happening. It doesn't take rocket science to see that distinction.

As for conspiracy, you're claiming the medical field - including administrators, doctors, and others - are committing large-scale fraud. That's rather the definition of conspiracy. Just because you'd do it, that doesn't mean doctors are doing it.

Honestly, if a hospital was going to engage in Medicare fraud, that seems like such a... petty and lowball way to go about it anyway. There was a local case here where a medical practice was engaging in Medicare fraud, by billing Medicare for a large number of procedures that they didn't actually do. IIRC, they'd see a patient, do some procedure, and then also bill Medicare for some other procedures. They got many, many millions of dollars this way. Now the doctors are in prison, of course, because Medicare does check up on things. Faking a few dozen Covid cases to get an extra $7,000 per person seems like it'd be a pretty amateur criminal enterprise. Like is that really worth the risk of never being able to work again?
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
21,236
Reaction score
6,750
Location
Covington, WA
Ah, gotcha. So science doesn't matter. You're just making conclusions from tiny bits of experience, rather than looking at the large-group studies and reviews that contradict you. As expected.
You're arguing with children. They are intrinsically unreasonable and no amount of common sense, evidence, or logic will convince them. They are quite simply barren ground for reasonable discussion. And until they mature, it's much easier to let rant and rave and carry on, and we can just advocate for things that will (hopefully) save them from themselves.

There are so many folks on this forum who are reasonable and mature. Much healthier to discuss things with them, and actually learn a thing or two, than get mired in a trip through crazy town.
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
We don't need to know how many people are infected to understand how many it has killed or hospitalized. The number that are infected but don't fit those two groups don't change anything about those two groups, as a % of the total population. (would only change what % of the infected - not the total population - make it to those two groups).

You are now mixing statistics AND confusing my comment. The 30% was one number I saw, and I said it wasn't a clear number. But you know you're trying to confuse the issue rather than discuss it. If you have an actual point or question, I'm happy to address them. Otherwise, I'm not interested in your attempts to obfusccate.

This is very bad logic until you know the hard numbers for COD.
To answer one of your previous questions with a question; show me where stats are Not getting blended? And to give an answer with your own answer, you Can't.
So if this is sound logic (which it isn't) explain the countless articles similar to the one I recently posted?

It would seem it is you attempting to obfuscate with your very circular answer.
 

dvcochran

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
7,047
Reaction score
2,296
Location
Southeast U.S.
Honestly, if a hospital was going to engage in Medicare fraud, that seems like such a... petty and lowball way to go about it anyway. There was a local case here where a medical practice was engaging in Medicare fraud, by billing Medicare for a large number of procedures that they didn't actually do. IIRC, they'd see a patient, do some procedure, and then also bill Medicare for some other procedures. They got many, many millions of dollars this way. Now the doctors are in prison, of course, because Medicare does check up on things. Faking a few dozen Covid cases to get an extra $7,000 per person seems like it'd be a pretty amateur criminal enterprise. Like is that really worth the risk of never being able to work again?
But if you read the article I attached you will see hospitals are 'playing within the rules' by adding Covid to the diagnosis, when it really has nothing to do with it.
To my knowledge there is not even a standard vehicle in place to confirm case classification.
To be clear, I am not questioning the integrity of doctors in large since they are typically not the ones responsible for billing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Discussions

Top