Covid Deaths in Alabama last three days
- Thread starter cookedw
- Start date
Any idea how many of these were motorcycle accident related?
So what you're saying is that you and other shares different opinions when looking at the same data, yet you think your opinion is "right" and the opposing viewpoint is a "conspiracy theory"...I love the irony in this comment, amazing.
If others want to bring educated opinions, then I'm happy to admit I am incorrect. However, when you have threads like what happened last night where people were lobbing baseless attacks at @jrodb24 ... or what similarly happened to @mrhickory a couple of days prior, then it's a real bad look for the "COVID isn't as bad as people are making it" crowd.
There aren't facts in their arguments ... just willful ignorance. As pointed out, it's complete Dunning-Kruger.
I mean there are those that think COVID is worth shutting everything down and those that think COVID is nothing..most though actually think it's serious and taking precautions while try their best to go along with life. It's not a one or other situation here. You keep acting like your opinion is the only truth, it's not...no one has been right about this, from the nations top infection expert, Dr. Fauci down to the Bunker. I do agree that those that attack doctors from this board that are on the front lines of this pandemic are shit heads. OP is pointing out a positive trend in Alabama in terms of death and yet we have people ITT not happy with that for whatever reason.
Is it wrong to ask about comorbidities....or how many of the covid patients are there because of covid or with covid...or is it wrong to be concerned with inconsistencies in reporting numbers and clinics reporting 100 percent positivity rates?...Can we not expect accurate numbers before we shut down the economy again?
Not at all, although in that specific EAMC doctors thread that information may not be know yet which is probably why he couldn't speak on it, but yea when you see so many numbers manipulated it's hard to truth the data that is being released, overall.
No actually the thread was about deaths and how they were trending downward the last few days and the hope of that continuing. You decided to change the narrative to hospitalizations. And again, you know that’s total right not one day?? But why change it anyway. It was a positive thread about deaths. Did that bother you so much you wanted to bring up some bad news?
I've come the conclusion that a vaccine is not going to help much. Polling on people opting to get a vaccine when available does not look good.
Ed Zachary...but don't say that too loud because some on this board will say it should be mandated.
Nailed it. Every thread plays out the same way. Any information that is less than 100% positive causes the usual suspects to pitch a fit over it not fitting their narrative. With any situation like this, there is always going to be positive and negative news. Deaths going down would be great news. Unfortunately, anyone who has followed this situation knows that a 3 day period over the weekend is not reliable to establish any trend due to the lag in reporting.
Record numbers of cases with a rising percentage of positive tests along with drastically increasing hospitalizations are all negative trends. Hopefully this does not translate to a continued rise in deaths. As Mr. H pointed out a couple of days ago, he and other doctors have learned a lot over the last few months and thus they are much better at treating COVID now which will hopefully continue to save many lives that might have otherwise been lost in March or April.
A "fact" without historical context can often be misunderstood.
If you take the time to look at the weekend death reports from the State of Alabama since the beginning, you will see that they are always very low. Therefore, if someone say "hey, look at this three day trend. It's good!" and two of those days are the historical low weekend days, then it can lead people to think the numbers are improving, when, in reality, they are getting worse overall.
As was shared just a couple of posts before this, everything is still, for the most part, up and to the right. Which is, in this case, not good. This isn't rocket science.
Is it not a good thing that deaths have leveled off the past 4-5 days in Alabama, like this chart shows? (taken from worldometer, not some 3rd party site)
No one said it wasn't good. Literally, no one. I, in fact, said it was good, but also pointed out that it may not be indicative of actual improvement and just a reflection of a backlog in reporting. I could end up being wrong about that. Hopefully, I am.
Yes, by all means, we should trust something called "worldometer" and not an Alabama citizen that has built a respectable tracking service that is oft-referenced by medical professionals and news organizations in the state.
I have to admit: At times, with comments like this, I sit back and ponder if you are being serious.
Yes I trust worldometer data(which every media outlet cites in their reporting) with directly links to all data from all 50 states health departments over a 3rd party site, you should too.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
BamaTracker.com is developed and maintained by firestream@gmail.com. The information, charts and data contained on this website is for educational and academic research purposes only. You should not rely upon the content of this website as a basis for making any business or legal decisions. Data collected from ADPH and is provided to the public strictly for educational and academic research purposes.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
This is like you choosing wikipedia as a source to write a paper
Good gosh, man. Where do you think bamatracker.com gets their data? Why do you inject these random side-debates into the conversations?!
The same place worldometer does(developed ..but on a MUCH larger scale and updated world wide, rather than one state. I now see why your opinion here is so skewed, you based it on 3rd party data from a site that at the bottom says "You should not rely upon the content of this website"...lololol.
I’m not sure if this what you’re saying about hospitalizations, but that’s the number of people currently hospitalized throughout the state, not a cumulative number of patients since the beginning of the pandemic, or the number of “new” hospitalizations. But I might be misinterpreting what you mean by “total.”
Worldometer manually analyzes, validates, and aggregates data from thousands of sources in real time and provides global COVID-19 live statistics for a wide audience of caring people around the world.
Our data is also trusted and used by the UK Government, Johns Hopkins CSSE, the Government of Thailand, the Government of Vietnam, the Government of Pakistan, Financial Times, The New York Times, Business Insider, BBC, and many others.
Over the past 15 years, our statistics have been requested by, and provided to Oxford University Press, Wiley, Pearson, CERN, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), The Atlantic, BBC, Milton J. Rubenstein Museum of Science & Technology, Science Museum of Virginia, Morgan Stanley, IBM, Hewlett Packard, Dell, Kaspersky, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Amazon Alexa, Google Translate, the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), the U2 concert, and many others.
Worldometer is cited as a source in over 10,000 published books and in more than 6,000 professional journal articles and was voted as one of the best free reference websites by the American Library Association (ALA), the oldest and largest library association in the world.
We collect and process data around the clock, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Multiple updates per minute are performed on average by our team of analysts and researchers who validate the data from an ever-growing list of over 5,000 sources under the constant solicitation of users who alert us as soon as an official announcement is made anywhere around the world.
But keep on citing data from a 3rd party site ran by like 4 people that has a disclaimer at the bottom about the accuracy of their data. So yea...
/micdrop
Damn, you figured me out. I tried to outwit your dominating intellect in this matter, but it was simply too much. What am I to do?
Bamatracker is publishing data directly from the ADPH. The fact you think their legal disclaimer means their info is unreliable is humorous, but the sort of idiotic conclusion we have come to expect from you.
Worldometer is just a data aggregating site. It wasn't developed for COVID and has been around for years. They collect data on all sorts of issues and publish it with little/no oversight as to accuracy. There has been a good bit of reporting on the origins of the site and who is behind it. A lot of their data has been shown to be incorrect.
What is Worldometer?
Before the pandemic, Worldometer was best known for its “counters,” which provided live estimates of numbers like the world’s population or the number of cars produced this year. Its website indicates that revenue comes from advertising and licensing its counters. The Covid-19 crisis has undoubtedly boosted the website’s popularity. It’s one of the top-ranking Google search results for coronavirus stats. In the past six months, Worldometer’s pages have been shared about 2.5 million times — up from just 65 shares in the first six months of 2019, according to statistics provided by BuzzSumo, a company that tracks social media engagement and provides insights into content.
The website claims to be “run by an international team of developers, researchers, and volunteers” and “published by a small and independent digital media company based in the United States.”
But public records show little evidence of a company that employs a multilingual team of analysts and researchers. It’s not clear whether the company has paid staff vetting its data for accuracy or whether it relies solely on automation and crowdsourcing. The site does have at least one job posting, from October, seeking a volunteer web developer.
Visitors can report new Covid-19 numbers and data sources to the website – no name or email address required. A “team of analysts and researchers” validate the data, the website says. It may, at first, sound like the Wikipedia of the data world, but some Wikipedia editors have decided to avoid Worldometer as a source for Covid-19 data.
“Several updates lack a source, do not match their cited source or contain errors,” one editor, posting under the username MarioGom, wrote on a discussion page for Wikipedia editors working on Covid-19-related content last month. “Some errors are small and temporary, but some are relatively big and never corrected.”
The editor, whose real name is Mario Gómez, told CNN in an email, “Instead of trying to use a consistent criteria, [Worldometer] seems to be going for the highest figure. They have a system for users to report higher figures, but so far I failed to use it to report that some figure is erroneous and should be lower.”
Edouard Mathieu, the data manager for Our World in Data (OWID), an independent statistics website headquartered at Oxford University, has seen a similar trend.
“Their main focus seems to be having the latest number wherever it comes from, whether it’s reliable or not, whether it’s well-sourced or not,” he said. “We think people should be wary, especially media, policy-makers and decision-makers. This data is not as accurate as they think it is.”
Virginia Pitzer, a Yale University epidemiologist focused on modeling Covid-19’s spread in the United States, said she’d never heard of Worldometer. CNN asked her to assess the website’s reliability.
Pitzer also found few detailed explanations of data reporting issues or discrepancies. For Spain, it’s a single sentence. For many other countries, there are no explanations at all.
She also found errors. In the Spanish data, for instance, Worldometer reports more than 18,000 recoveries on April 24. The Spanish government reported 3,105 recoveries that day.
Ok, I'll give it a try:
Step 1: Stick head in sand.
Step 2: Repeat to myself: "It's all getting better. It's all getting better. I like good news. I can't trust the numbers."
You're right ... ignorance really is bliss.
What "party" site do you think worldometer is? 1st?
Worldometer is pulling data from sources all over the world to update their totals for every country and province. As noted in the article I posted above, many errors have been identified in their data which is to be expected from a site that is rapidly aggregating a massive amount of data with little/no curation for accuracy. Meanwhile, bama tracker is pulling data from 1 source, the ADPH, and reporting it. Which site do you think is more likely to have accurate information on Alabama?
Which "party" site is worldometer? Why'd you dodge that question?
Bama tracker and worldometer are both reporting data. The latter is reporting it from all over the world and many errors have been identified in their reporting. The former is reporting data from 1 source, the ADPH. Can you take a shot at which one is likely to be more accurate for Alabama related info?
Yes it’s the current cumulative total. I had simply asked him if he knew that. He came into a positive thread about deaths over the last three days and now it is the usual doom and gloom all bad news argument like every other positive news thread
Rice picked another dumb hill to die on. Worldometer has the following lengthy disclaimer on their site telling people they should not rely on any of the information they report:
Worldometers.info Disclaimer and Terms of Service
Information on this web site is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either express or implied about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the web site or the information, products, services, or graphics contained on the web site for any purpose including, but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement. Some jurisdictions do not allow the exclusion of implied warranties, so the above exclusion may not apply to you.
You expressly understand and agree that Worldometers.info shall not be liable to you for:
a) any direct, indirect, incidental, special, consequential or exemplary damages which may be incurred by you, however caused and under any theory of liability. This shall include, but not be limited to, any loss of profit or revenue (whether incurred directly or indirectly), any loss of goodwill or business reputation, any loss of data suffered, cost of procurement of substitute goods or services, or other intangible loss;
b) any direct, indirect, incidental, special, consequential or exemplary damages arising out of or related to Worldometers.info web site or the information contained in it, whether such damages arise in contract, negligence, tort, under statute, in equity, at law or otherwise;
c) any loss or damage which may be incurred by you, including but not limited to loss or damage as a result of:
- any reliance placed by you on the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the information on the web site and the services provided;
- any changes which Worldometers.info may make to the information or services, or for any permanent or temporary cessation in the provision of the information or services (or any related features);
Ouch. Worldometers didn't meet wikipedia's standard for data reliability or accuracy. Poor rice cakes...
The curiosity about the possible Chinese ownership of Worldometer is not just a consequence of suspicion as to the veracity of Chinese coronavirus data, but also of problems with Worldometer’s process of data collation. There were perhaps inevitable incidents of hacking in March which suggested the Vatican City had had 892,045 deaths. A remarkable figure, let alone that those deaths were from 568,000 cases in a country with a population of around 800. But the site has other problems apart from hackers.
Max Roser, a researcher at Oxford University and founder of Our World In Data, has expressed frustration at the site. He tweeted: “I’m annoyed by Worldometer because it wastes so much of my and my team’s time. For weeks we get messages of people asking why do we not show this or that – ‘Worldometer has the data’. And too often when you look into it, they provide no source or it is wrong.” He says the site has made mistakes in reporting test numbers, in its labelling of metrics, and confusion of case fatality rate with infection fatality rate.
Unlike Wikipedia, Worldometer’s team are totally anonymous. There’s no edit history, talk page, or audit log, apart from bullet pointed country-by-country daily updates, some of which are provided with a link to the original source while others aren’t. The missing sources and occasional mismatch between the data in the source and the update were enough for Wikipedia editors to decide not to permit any use of Worldometer as a source in any coronavirus related pages.
https://www.newstatesman.com/scienc...r-quick-project-became-one-most-popular-sites
The curiosity about the possible Chinese ownership of Worldometer is not just a consequence of suspicion as to the veracity of Chinese coronavirus data, but also of problems with Worldometer’s process of data collation. There were perhaps inevitable incidents of hacking in March which suggested the Vatican City had had 892,045 deaths. A remarkable figure, let alone that those deaths were from 568,000 cases in a country with a population of around 800. But the site has other problems apart from hackers.
Max Roser, a researcher at Oxford University and founder of Our World In Data, has expressed frustration at the site. He tweeted: “I’m annoyed by Worldometer because it wastes so much of my and my team’s time. For weeks we get messages of people asking why do we not show this or that – ‘Worldometer has the data’. And too often when you look into it, they provide no source or it is wrong.” He says the site has made mistakes in reporting test numbers, in its labelling of metrics, and confusion of case fatality rate with infection fatality rate.
Unlike Wikipedia, Worldometer’s team are totally anonymous. There’s no edit history, talk page, or audit log, apart from bullet pointed country-by-country daily updates, some of which are provided with a link to the original source while others aren’t. The missing sources and occasional mismatch between the data in the source and the update were enough for Wikipedia editors to decide not to permit any use of Worldometer as a source in any coronavirus related pages.
https://www.newstatesman.com/scienc...r-quick-project-became-one-most-popular-sites
This doesn’t help your case it’s a disclaimer that data reported DIRECTLY from state health websites isn’t always accurate which we know. Your attempting to argue a website equivalent to Godaddy.com is more accurate than a registered domain name/hub used world wide to report COVID data in real time during a pandemic. Congrats on being a moron, dildo meat 8
We don't have the mettle as a society to deal with harsh realities. Gimme muh GOOD NEWS only.
