Sunday, June 28, 2020
Just the flu? No, much less than the flu.
Another dramatic chart.
Is the Branded Flu "just the flu"? No, it's LESS than "the flu", almost everywhere.
The chart compares deaths from the Haute-Couture Branded Flu with deaths from the 2018 unbranded flu. (Two years ago to avoid conflation.)
In most states the regular flu ranged from 2 times to 5 times as deadly as the Branded Flu.
Here's a graph of the ratios:
You can see that the typical ratio is 5 times as many deaths from 2018 flu as from Branded Flu.
The ratio chart doesn't do a good job of showing the few opposite states, since they're just less than 1.
To show the exceptions I did a log of the ratios.
Here you can see the exceptions (negative logs, below the axis) clearly.
CO and MA and MI and RI were slightly worse this year.
CT and NJ and NY and LA were massively worse this year.
In 46 states this Branded Flu posed no special threat to hospitals or health systems or anyone who wasn't already dying. It was usually much less serious than unbranded.
This set doesn't show an immediately obvious correlation between more vs less lockdowns. Other comparisons show a definite difference, with more deaths from lockdowns. Causation is still open to doubt, with too many confounding variables. I'd guess that the lockdowns made things worse in NYC where people were already in hermetically sealed apts and offices. Total lockdown sealed them in even tighter. In other states the flu affected only dying people in nursing homes, who weren't getting any exercise or fresh air before the lockdown. External changes don't matter much when you're scheduled to die soon.
Note especially South Dakota, the LEAST lockdowned, had only 11 Branded vs 245 unbranded in 2018. If the Branded Flu had a special quality that intrinsically required lockdowns, AS WE WERE REPEATEDLY TOLD, the alleged POSITIVE effect of lockdowns would show up everywhere. No unlocked place could have such a low death count.
What's not open to doubt is the massive permanent damage from lockdowns to all other parts of life, especially medical care for all other illnesses and immunity to future viruses.
The Haute-Couture Branded Flu was a real problem in NYC metro and New Orleans, and that's all.
Here's the XLS that I wrote from the image of the chart. Probably a couple typos.
You can see that the typical ratio is 5 times as many deaths from 2018 flu as from Branded Flu.
The ratio chart doesn't do a good job of showing the few opposite states, since they're just less than 1.
To show the exceptions I did a log of the ratios.
Here you can see the exceptions (negative logs, below the axis) clearly.
CO and MA and MI and RI were slightly worse this year.
CT and NJ and NY and LA were massively worse this year.
In 46 states this Branded Flu posed no special threat to hospitals or health systems or anyone who wasn't already dying. It was usually much less serious than unbranded.
This set doesn't show an immediately obvious correlation between more vs less lockdowns. Other comparisons show a definite difference, with more deaths from lockdowns. Causation is still open to doubt, with too many confounding variables. I'd guess that the lockdowns made things worse in NYC where people were already in hermetically sealed apts and offices. Total lockdown sealed them in even tighter. In other states the flu affected only dying people in nursing homes, who weren't getting any exercise or fresh air before the lockdown. External changes don't matter much when you're scheduled to die soon.
Note especially South Dakota, the LEAST lockdowned, had only 11 Branded vs 245 unbranded in 2018. If the Branded Flu had a special quality that intrinsically required lockdowns, AS WE WERE REPEATEDLY TOLD, the alleged POSITIVE effect of lockdowns would show up everywhere. No unlocked place could have such a low death count.
What's not open to doubt is the massive permanent damage from lockdowns to all other parts of life, especially medical care for all other illnesses and immunity to future viruses.
The Haute-Couture Branded Flu was a real problem in NYC metro and New Orleans, and that's all.
Here's the XLS that I wrote from the image of the chart. Probably a couple typos.
Labels: Constants and Variables
¶ 10:02 AM
