27 Apr 20
The state removed probable cases from its revised tally of the death toll as it refined its reporting of data. Total deaths on Thursday were listed by the state at 1,421 deaths, down from the 1,622 deaths reported Wednesday.
https://www.heraldmailmedia.com/news/special/coronavirus/after-revision-franklin-county-covid-death-count-drops-from-10-to-1/article_5d54b564-bc86-5231-b06f-49540b6d6195.html
Although not in this story, it was the coroners who stepped in and said these official numbers are too high. My wife alerted me to this while reading Facebook, so I googled it and found this.
27 Apr 20
@eladar saidActually Pennsylvania is now deliberately ignoring CDC guidelines and retroactively removing deaths already included in their prior counts.
The state removed probable cases from its revised tally of the death toll as it refined its reporting of data. Total deaths on Thursday were listed by the state at 1,421 deaths, down from the 1,622 deaths reported Wednesday.
https://www.heraldmailmedia.com/news/special/coronavirus/after-revision-franklin-county-covid-death-count-drops-from-10-to-1/article_5d54b564-bc86-5231 ...[text shortened]... ers are too high. My wife alerted me to this while reading Facebook, so I googled it and found this.
So what they are doing is falsifying data to create an undercount if that article is correct.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
27 Apr 20
3 edits
@no1marauder saidThey aren't removed, they are keeping them separate. As they should be.
Actually Pennsylvania is now deliberately ignoring CDC guidelines and retroactively removing deaths already included in their prior counts.
So what they are doing is falsifying data to create an undercount if that article is correct.
The CDC only provides guidelines. States are free to report to the public however they choose.
27 Apr 20
@joe-shmo saidNo, they've been actually removed. Try finding any listing of "probables" on its official website. https://www.health.pa.gov/topics/disease/coronavirus/Pages/Cases.aspx
They aren't removed, they are keeping them separate. As they should be.
The CDC only provides guidelines, States are free to report how they choose.
Fraudulent practices like what is being done here impede the CDC's efforts:
"An accurate count of the number of deaths due to COVID–19
infection, which depends in part on proper death certification,
is critical to ongoing public health surveillance and response. "
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
27 Apr 20
3 edits
@no1marauder saidhttps://www.cdc.gov/phlp/docs/phl101/PHL101-Unit-5-16Jan09-Secure.pdf
No, they've been actually removed. Try finding any listing of "probables" on its official website. https://www.health.pa.gov/topics/disease/coronavirus/Pages/Cases.aspx
Fraudulent practices like what is being done here impede the CDC's efforts:
"An accurate count of the number of deaths due to COVID–19
infection, which depends in part on proper death certification ...[text shortened]... public health surveillance and response. "
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf
See page 13
My friend is a State Epidemiologist, they told me this first hand when I asked about this hideous data collection system that is counting ALL Probable's as Confirmed. BTW, They agreed. Ideally they should be kept separate, but they DO NOT have the legal authority to enforce specifically how the data is collected or reported on a State level.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
27 Apr 20
@no1marauder saidI'm obviously not a lawyer, I'm just telling you what was told to me by an expert in the field.
So what?
BTW, see Page 4 though I am not claiming that the provisions of Federal law that created the CDC require the States to not defraud it.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
27 Apr 20
@no1marauder saidAlso, the fact that you think its fraudulent that Probable's are NOT counted, as opposed to being counted show significant bias. Honest people only wish that a spade be called a spade.
No, they've been actually removed. Try finding any listing of "probables" on its official website. https://www.health.pa.gov/topics/disease/coronavirus/Pages/Cases.aspx
Fraudulent practices like what is being done here impede the CDC's efforts:
"An accurate count of the number of deaths due to COVID–19
infection, which depends in part on proper death certification ...[text shortened]... public health surveillance and response. "
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf
27 Apr 20
@joe-shmo saidNo, it isn't. It should count both Confirmed and Probables in Total Deaths: no State is "counting ALL Probable's as Confirmed" as you incorrectly claim.
https://www.cdc.gov/phlp/docs/phl101/PHL101-Unit-5-16Jan09-Secure.pdf
See page 13
My friend is a State Epidemiologist, they told me this first hand when I asked about this hideous data collection system that is counting ALL Probable's as Confirmed. BTW, They agreed. Ideally they should be kept separate, but they DO NOT have the legal authority to enforce specifically how the data is collected or reported on a State level.
PA, it that article is correct, started including "probables" in total deaths (in accordance with CDC guidelines) and then abruptly stopped doing so and retroactively applied that change. That is deliberately undercounting.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 06
- Moves
- 8528
27 Apr 20
1 edit
@no1marauder saidYou cant prove that they have destroyed the other data set? Nor can you prove that they don't continue to keep the record in accordance with the CDC guidelines for the CDC data set? All, you can show is they ( by legal right ) are not reporting probable's to the public.
No, it isn't. It should count both Confirmed and Probables in Total Deaths: no State is "counting ALL Probable's as Confirmed" as you incorrectly claim.
PA, it that article is correct, started including "probables" in total deaths (in accordance with CDC guidelines) and then abruptly stopped doing so and retroactively applied that change. That is deliberately undercounting.
27 Apr 20
1 edit
@joe-shmo saidYou don't know what you are talking about as usual.
Also, the fact that you think its fraudulent that Probable's are NOT counted, as opposed to being counted show significant bias. Honest people only wish that a spade be called a spade.
Yes, it's fraudulent not to include "probables" in total deaths since they have to be determined with a degree of medical certainty. Everyone knows that including only those with positive tests in a death count for a disease (something never done before) results in a undercount. So if you want reliable data, probables (which in this case only means that a test hasn't been done not that the determination hasn't been made with using sound medical judgment) have to be included.
The only reason right wingers don't want them included is to give a false impression of the extent of the disease's death toll.
27 Apr 20
@joe-shmo saidHello, Mr. Strawman.
You cant prove that they have destroyed the other data set? Nor can you prove that they don't continue to keep the record in accordance with the CDC guidelines for the CDC data set? All, you can show is they ( by legal right ) are not reporting probable's to the public.
No one claimed they " destroyed the other data set".
I'm not an expert in PA law, but I doubt the Health Department is allowed to give knowingly false data to the public. Maybe the OP article is mistaken and there is a reasonable explanation that doesn't involve deliberate removal of probable deaths from official counts.
27 Apr 20
1 edit
@joe-shmo saidThere's a similar thing going on with the UK figures. Initially they were attempting contact tracing, but that fell away as they realised they could run out of the necessary chemicals so reduced it to testing on the basis of clinical need. Now they're expanding testing again and although test results are divided into three (of four) so-called pillars, which does help, what is regarded as clinically necessary is going to change with time depending on the pressure on hospitals. Ideally they'd have a score for severity of symptoms at the time of test. With 0 asymptomatic up to 10 for requiring critical care. That way what the test result means is clear and it becomes a lot easier to get an overall picture of how many people are likely to have been infected.
https://www.cdc.gov/phlp/docs/phl101/PHL101-Unit-5-16Jan09-Secure.pdf
See page 13
My friend is a State Epidemiologist, they told me this first hand when I asked about this hideous data collection system that is counting ALL Probable's as Confirmed. BTW, They agreed. Ideally they should be kept separate, but they DO NOT have the legal authority to enforce specifically how the data is collected or reported on a State level.
Edit: I'm referring to cases here rather than deaths. There are two counts in the UK for deaths, hospitalised deaths of test confirmed patients as reported by Public Health England and all deaths where covid-19 was on the death certificate as reported by the Office of National Statistics - the former is quicker and the latter has a fortnight's delay.
27 Apr 20
"When reporting cause of death on a death certificate, use any information available, such as medical history, medical records, laboratory tests, an autopsy report, or other sources of relevant information. Similar to many other diagnoses, a cause-of-death statement is an informed medical opinion that should be based on sound medical judgment drawn from clinical training and experience, as well as knowledge of current disease states and local trends (6)"
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf
That is the general rule not specific to COVID. What right wingers are insisting on now is varying from that general rule purely for political reasons.