How many more must die for the throne? or How to combat FUD! - Part 3 (Update 1

How many more must die for the throne? or How to combat FUD! - Part 3 (Update 1 - At Bottom of Post)

JMJ

Smith made the following statement::

Simple. On Dec. 27, 2020, I took the official world COVID death numbers from worldometers.com, divided it by the world population of 7.8 billion, moved the resulting number's decimal point two places to the right to get a percentage and a total population mortality rate. That TPMR was 0.023%. In contrast, taking an average of the estimates that have been made for total deaths from Spanish flu, and dividing it by the estimated world population at that time, etc. you get a TPMR for Spanish flu of 2.33%

Smith and I have been exchanging emails about this stat and a few other things.

First, what is the TPMR for the Spanish Flu and what does it mean?

Total Population Mortality rate.

I understand that there is some variation in the estimates of the population of the World in 1918. This is understandable on a number of levels.

I've seen census notations from that era., so the USA had a working census system.

So this is probably a more reliable population for assessing the TPMR.

As I noted in part 2 of this series, we can reliably calculate the impact that Spanish Influenza had on the population in 1918 as well as today.

H1N1 (USA) Deaths 675k / Population (1918) 105,000,000 = 0.0064 (0.64%)
SARS-CoV-2 (USA) Deaths 589,207 / Population (2021) 332,606,157 = 0.0018 (0.18%)

While the US SARS-CoV-2 outbreak is still going on, to reach the same level of impact as the Spanish Influenza an additional 1,539,472 people would have to die from that pathogen. Even if the seven day average of 722 deaths per day were to continue the pandemic would have to last an additional 5.8years.

That appears to be unlikely given that a third wave does not appear to be manifesting and the death rate is declining.

As I noted in How Many More ..., it does indeed look like the USA is on the edge of herd immunity due to infection and its immunization plan.

It also looks like, as Smith was trying to point out, that it won't be as bad as 1918. The death toll from H1N1 was 3.6 times worse than those that have died so far. Barring a 3rd wave, we will probably see only between another 50k to 120k more deaths in the USA.

The pandemic isn't over yet ... but from the data I have been able to access, none of the variants have mutated to such a degree as to escape the immunizing effects of either exposure or the current vaccines.

With an estimated IFR of 0.5%, we can estimate that it could have been much worse if measures had not been taken.

But what people will be asking for a while is ... was it worth it? Most cite the economic impacts.

I take a different perspective, was it not a matter of duty to do what could be done to protect life over money.

Of course this pales in comparison to the continue and deliberate murder of babies, but that is an pandemic of another sort.

P^3

Update 1 - At what point does herd immunity impact the progression of a pathogen like SARS-CoV-2?

So I woke up this morning thinking about how a pathogen passes through a population and ... at what point does it reach herd immunity? I went back to the Wiki page and found the formula.

So the current Ro for SARS-CoV-2 is 2. So herd immunity threshold is about 50%. Here's the graph that I found

So - once you get to 50% the outbreak should peter out. So what does that mean for this pandemic?

I'll stick with the states since I'm on that theme and they seem to be heading towards herd immunity.

A 50% herd immunity in the states is 166,303,078 people. So, assuming that half the population needs to be infected, no vaccine is available, and an IFR of 0.005 we arrive at a theoretical fatality of 831,515 people.

So there have been 33,044,872 cases in the states. The ratio cited at the beginning was that cases represent about 20% of infections. So that means that Cases = 0.2 * Infections and ergo infections = Cased / 0.2 = 165,224,360 or ... about half the population.

Vaccinations in the states have reached about 24%.

So yep, the USA is (in my opinion) in the herd immunity zone. Although re-infections could affect this outcome.

The next few months will show whether I'm right or wrong.

P^3

P.S. So what about Canada?

Key points

Population: 38,015,263
Herd Immunity Threshold: 19,007,631
Cases:1,211,083
Est Infections: 6,055,415
Infection %:16%
Immunizations: 24% (not fully but at least full dose)
Immune Level: 40%

So Canada is getting close.

Also, in Canada the third wave has a different profile with case over 60y dropping from 30% to 19.7%. However the fatality rate has only dropped by a percent to 95.5%.

This graphic tells the story better:

In Canada, COVID-19 is now moving through the younger population.

P^3

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law – Part I: Dr. John Lamont

+ JMJ Is a Traditional Catholic who abandons the doctrine of the Catholic Church - are they truly worthy of the name of Catholic? This is why it is important to understand Catholic Doctrine so we don't knowingly abandon it! This is a lecture provided by Dr. Lamont that touches on the topic of obedience. Obedience is one key to emerging from this crisis. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May 2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law – Part I By John Lamont (Lecture given in New York on Friday, April 4, 2014)

Schism

There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches: "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making. It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX. The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience. The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members. It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...

Tradicat

Search This Blog