回复 205楼ytwk2的帖子 这一位层主，认为今年flu死亡率高的原因，是今年的flu shot不太行。现在我来打脸了。三天前的新闻。CDC说今年的flu shot的效果很好，至少比去年好。 Flu shot better than last year, despite tough season for kids https://abcnews.go.com/Health/1300-people-died-flu-year/story?id=67754182 Despite enduring two waves of viruses during the 2019-2020 flu season, new estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that the vaccine is relatively good match for this year's flu strains. While we won't have exact figures until after the flu season is over, the 2019-2020 vaccine is estimated to be 45% effective overall and 55% effective in children.In comparison, the 2018-2019 flu vaccine was roughly 29% effective.
Despite enduring two waves of viruses during the 2019-2020 flu season, new estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that the vaccine is relatively good match for this year's flu strains.
While we won't have exact figures until after the flu season is over, the 2019-2020 vaccine is estimated to be 45% effective overall and 55% effective in children.In comparison, the 2018-2019 flu vaccine was roughly 29% effective. silverblade 发表于 2/24/2020 10:13:59 PM
你自己看你的链接中提到“ Early 2019 to 2020 flu activity primarily was driven by influenza B/Victoria viruses, for which the vaccine is not a great match, Schaffner said.” 。还有就是从我205层中的几个图里你可以看到今年typeB病毒（绿颜色部分）明显比往年占的比例高多了，这也是流感疫苗miss了B type病毒的标志。
Despite enduring two waves of viruses during the 2019-2020 flu season, new estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that the vaccine is relatively good match for this year's flu strains.
While we won't have exact figures until after the flu season is over, the 2019-2020 vaccine is estimated to be 45% effective overall and 55% effective in children.In comparison, the 2018-2019 flu vaccine was roughly 29% effective. silverblade 发表于 2/24/2020 10:13:59 PM
你自己看你的链接中提到“ Early 2019 to 2020 flu activity primarily was driven by influenza B/Victoria viruses, for which the vaccine is not a great match, Schaffner said.” 。还有就是从我205层中的几个图里你可以看到今年typeB病毒（绿颜色部分）明显比往年占的比例高多了，这也是流感疫苗miss了B type病毒的标志。
自己贴的东西都不仔细看，自己打自己的脸。
ytwk2 发表于 2/24/2020 10:38:09 PM
标题上都说了，今年的flu shot很match。你偏要从文中找出一点反面的信息。即便这个反面的信息，也不是你说的意思。 对于B流感，is not a great match，这并不是miss的意思，而是不是特别好的意思。你将今年死亡率高归因于flu b太牵强了。即便假设今年的flu shot效果真不好，你还要证明，患上了B流感的青壮年死亡率要比患上了A流感的老年人还要高，这显然不符合事实。我前面已经贴出了权威网站的信息，A流感和B流感对于相同年纪的人致死率差不多。患上B流感的青壮年死亡率应该比换上A流感的老年人低很多。
Early 2019 to 2020 flu activity primarily was driven by influenza B/Victoria viruses, for which the vaccine is not a great match, Schaffner said. Later, flu activity shifted and the country saw a rising number of cases from the A/H1N1 viruses.
The flu shot was a better match for A/H1N1.
In general, influenza B is more common in children, while influenza A, also called H1N1, is more commonly seen in older adults, according to Dr. Jessica Grayson, an assistant professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
标题上都说了，今年的flu shot很match。你偏要从文中找出一点反面的信息。即便这个反面的信息，也不是你说的意思。 对于B流感，is not a great match，这并不是miss的意思，而是不是特别好的意思。你将今年死亡率高归因于flu b太牵强了。即便假设今年的flu shot效果真不好，你还要证明，患上了B流感的青壮年死亡率要比患上了A流感的老年人还要高，这显然不符合事实。我前面已经贴出了权威网站的信息，A流感和B流感对于相同年纪的人致死率差不多。患上B流感的青壮年死亡率应该比换上A流感的老年人低很多。
silverblade 发表于 2/24/2020 10:59:16 PM
你用谷歌搜一下“flu vaccine missed strain”就可以看到下面图中的这些结果，这么多文章都用“miss matched”、“off the mark”、“doesn't match”来描述今年流感疫苗的有效性是因为CDC自己给出的数据显示了今年的患者中测出了比往年多得多的的B type病毒。 至于今年的青壮年住院死亡率相对老年人比去年高的原因，你可以比较我205层中的2019-2020和2018-2019两个图中的数据，再考虑H1N1对65岁以上的患者相对低致命性和对65岁以下的患者相对高致命性，以及H3对65岁以上的患者相对高致命性和对65岁以下的患者相对低致命性再加上今年H3的感染率比以往几年又特别低这些因素，就不难理解为什么今年有这样的死亡率的原因了。
你是指这张表中说的Type A中的数据中有“subtyping not performed”和type B中的数据中有“lineage not performed“吗？这些都已经说了是type A、B流感病毒了。如果你是指的其它的内容请把内容贴在这里我们再决定unknown是指哪一种流感病毒不明还是哪一种病毒不明。
State of the flu: How bad is the 2013-2014 flu season?
The flu is making headlines across the country—and for good reason. The oft-underestimated disease can spread quickly and prove unexpectedly deadly.
The deadly outbreak in North Texas appears to have driven many to get late flu shots, and some pharmacies are now reporting shortages. Similarly, California hospitals are struggling to manage severe flu outbreaks that have claimed the lives of as many as 146 adults under age 65, according to state epidemiologists. By comparison, California had reported only nine flu-related deaths in that age group at this time last year.
State of the flu: Hospitals struggle with saline shortage Health care providers say that a worsening shortage of saline for IV bags may complicate their ability to care for patients, especially as the demand for saline solution grows during the ongoing flu season. According to the CDC's latest report, which includes data through Jan. 18, influenza-like illness (ILI) activity currently is widespread in 41 states, and 13 states are reporting high levels of ILI activity. https://forums.huaren.us/editpost.aspx?topicid=2510332&postid=82899152&forumpage=1&pageid=1
The male resident, who has been identified as being in his 50s, was initially thought to have pneumonia, but was transferred to Kaiser Permanente in San Jose where he tested positive for COVID-19.
The male resident, who has been identified as being in his 50s, was initially thought to have pneumonia, but was transferred to Kaiser Permanente in San Jose where he tested positive for COVID-19.
The male resident, who has been identified as being in his 50s, was initially thought to have pneumonia, but was transferred to Kaiser Permanente in San Jose where he tested positive for COVID-19.
楼主你开这个楼的目的是要说因为今年流感青壮年住院和死亡比前两年的数目多而老年人比前两年少，所以很有可能CDC把大量新冠病人统计入流感数据。今天的新闻加州一例“ initially thought to have pneumonia” 后来“tested positive for COVID-19”就能证明CDC把大量新冠病人计入流感统计数据？你懂“initially thought”是什么意思吗？这和CDC计入流感统计数据有什么关系？难道CDC是根据“initially thought”来统计病人感染、住院、死亡数目的？
The male resident, who has been identified as being in his 50s, was initially thought to have pneumonia, but was transferred to Kaiser Permanente in San Jose where he tested positive for COVID-19.
Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the team found about 15,000 excess deaths from March 1 to April 4. During the same time, states reported 8,000 deaths from Covid-19. "That is close to double," Dan Weinberger, who studies the epidemiology of infectious diseases at Yale, told CNN.
"What we see is that in many states, you see an increase in influenza-like illnesses, and then a week or two later, you see an increase in deaths due to pneumonia and influenza," Weinberger said. "It provides some confirmation that what we are seeing is related to coronavirus."
Plus, in especially hard-hit states such as New York and New Jersey, where coronavirus is known to have spread widely and infected many people, overall deaths were far in excess in what would normally have been expected in March. "In New York City, this discrepancy was even more stark, with three to four times as many excess all-cause deaths as pneumonia and influenza deaths," the team wrote.
客观地说，也有可能是武汉人普遍体质扛不住？
你看不懂文章吗？还是不识字？人家写明了是住院死亡率，而不是所有患了流感人的死亡率。
什么科学data mining，你们和楼主看得懂data吗？楼主说美国可能爆发新冠的根据是2019-2020流感季节老人住院占总住院人数的比例低了。我在149层已经说过了，H1N1病毒对65岁以上的老年人住院率和死亡率本来就是比其它流感病毒低得多。对老年人来说A type中的H3和B type病毒比A type中的H1N1致命性要高，和往年比起来今年H3病毒患病率相比H1N1低得多，所以老人的住院率肯定就低了。
至于为什么今年死亡率比往年高了一点或65岁以下住院率比往年高了， 那是因为今年疫苗miss了B type病毒，所以感染B type病毒的人比往年要多，对这些人来说B和H1N1一样致命性高，所以死亡率就高。
还有楼主把今年得流感的人多也作为美国有新冠病毒流行的依据，拜托流感历来有大年小年之分，你们这点常识都没有？
什么回去看数据，数据我都给你贴在205楼里了，你自己看不懂还说别人蒙你？
他就是不听不听也不看，so far 17-18年明明更严重，明明H1N1对青壮年还有儿童影响更大，非得说今年异样。懒得和他说了
我只认CDC网站的公开数据。你给我看的数据，我不知道来源。
来源就是CDC
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/flu_by_age_virus.html
既然是CDC的数据我就认真看一下。我发现你的数据跟我讨论的数据不一样。你的数据是测试样品，严重的不严重的都在里面。我的数据是住院病人的数据。因为我关心的焦点是肺炎，不是普通的流感患者。普通流感患者数量太大，数据已经不敏感了，没有分析的意义。而且你的数据，都是测试flu阳性的，加上这个限制你就什么都分析不出来了。而我的数据里面，包括了测不出来是什么flu的，也就是不明原因的肺炎也包括在里面。这一点很重要。
你自己看你的链接中提到“ Early 2019 to 2020 flu activity primarily was driven by influenza B/Victoria viruses, for which the vaccine is not a great match, Schaffner said.” 。还有就是从我205层中的几个图里你可以看到今年typeB病毒（绿颜色部分）明显比往年占的比例高多了，这也是流感疫苗miss了B type病毒的标志。
自己贴的东西都不仔细看，自己打自己的脸。
所以打flu shot非常重要。打了flu shot，不一定能防住流感，但至少可以减轻流感的症状。打了flu shot，基本就不会因为流感恶化成肺炎而死了。我查看过台湾因为流感而死亡的病例，无一例外都是没有打flu shot的。
确诊=住院？服了…… Flu 死亡率0.1%好吗？
你一楼里给出的图中不是说了“ characteristics of influenza-associated hospitalizations”吗？患者的样本测出来不是flu阳性怎么会包括在和流感有关的住院率数据里？
=====================================================================
实在看不下去了
flu 的death rate一向都是千分之几好吧，新冠在2-4%官方数据
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html
真佩服你还心平气和的在这儿科普。
可惜双标狗根本不听啊
当初有民科分析武汉的数据，一个二个跳起来巴不得数据再翻倍。现在你贴个简简单单的加减乘除，就被扣上 粉 5m文科生的帽子了呢。
这次疫情真是让某些人丑陋愚蠢的思想有了散发臭气的出口。
标题上都说了，今年的flu shot很match。你偏要从文中找出一点反面的信息。即便这个反面的信息，也不是你说的意思。 对于B流感，is not a great match，这并不是miss的意思，而是不是特别好的意思。你将今年死亡率高归因于flu b太牵强了。即便假设今年的flu shot效果真不好，你还要证明，患上了B流感的青壮年死亡率要比患上了A流感的老年人还要高，这显然不符合事实。我前面已经贴出了权威网站的信息，A流感和B流感对于相同年纪的人致死率差不多。患上B流感的青壮年死亡率应该比换上A流感的老年人低很多。
现捉一只毛，哈哈哈
你是和楼主一样看不懂数据还要意淫给别人科普？楼主贴的文章中明明说了今年流感疫苗对type B不很match，你到底是看不懂呢还是在做你的“双标狗”？
你可以点击我主楼的链接，进去看一看，virus type是包含了unknown的。要是不包含这个，我分析个啥呀。
真好笑，你算了计算题吗？你自己给别人扣帽子骂人好像更高级一样。根据CDC数据，最严重的17-18，住院人数81万，死亡人数6万1，住院死亡率多少？你算了吗？比今年低吗？是楼主贴的那个数字吗？不是文科生吗？
你一定很奇怪，为什么这么多人，基本的事实都不看，就猛批我。原因是两天前我发了下面这个帖，在很多人眼中我已经是不共戴天的仇敌。发这个帖和很多人结仇，我后不后悔呢？我本来是有点后悔的，跟人结仇真的不是我喜欢干的事。有朋友告诉我，我这个帖引起了多地华人的注意，因为神韵会去那些地方巡演。当地的华人纷纷联系当地的政府部门，表达相关的担忧。政府也意识到了确实有危险，加强了相关的防范和管理。所以最后，我还是不后悔的。
美华要注意神韵，刚从韩国回来，在美国巡演，流动的传染源https://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2509657
别再秀智商了好吗？到底脑子是有多不好用？？？？既读不懂英语也做不来数学。我把下一段贴出来给你看看，好好用百度翻译一下吧，看懂了再来秀好嘛？
Early 2019 to 2020 flu activity primarily was driven by influenza B/Victoria viruses, for which the vaccine is not a great match, Schaffner said. Later, flu activity shifted and the country saw a rising number of cases from the A/H1N1 viruses.
The flu shot was a better match for A/H1N1.
In general, influenza B is more common in children, while influenza A, also called H1N1, is more commonly seen in older adults, according to Dr. Jessica Grayson, an assistant professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
这种政治性的结论，我没有兴趣。既没有逻辑基础，也没有意义。我的结论是基于数据。今年的流感数据明显有反常，伤害的是中青年，而且死亡率还更高。这是我要传递的主要信息。次要信息是，这个反常会不会跟新冠有关联？CDC不测新冠，在当前新冠大流行的背景下，会不会一些新冠病例被包含在了流感病例里？我的怀疑不一定对，但也绝不是空穴来风的怀疑。这是一个正常人，在面对反常的流感数据时，生出的很自然的怀疑。把数据解释清楚，打消人们的疑虑，这是CDC要做的工作。
满篇攻击中找到课代表不容易，感觉楼主就是这个意思
17-18年最严重你们感觉到了吗？09年都有人感觉不到。流感年年有，为啥大家感觉今年才有，不就是因为老有人不停滴灌输，而实际上流感全世界都有包括中国，哪儿来的各执一毒的说法
你用谷歌搜一下“flu vaccine missed strain”就可以看到下面图中的这些结果，这么多文章都用“miss matched”、“off the mark”、“doesn't match”来描述今年流感疫苗的有效性是因为CDC自己给出的数据显示了今年的患者中测出了比往年多得多的的B type病毒。
至于今年的青壮年住院死亡率相对老年人比去年高的原因，你可以比较我205层中的2019-2020和2018-2019两个图中的数据，再考虑H1N1对65岁以上的患者相对低致命性和对65岁以下的患者相对高致命性，以及H3对65岁以上的患者相对高致命性和对65岁以下的患者相对低致命性再加上今年H3的感染率比以往几年又特别低这些因素，就不难理解为什么今年有这样的死亡率的原因了。
今年门诊的医生朋友中招好几个，多年来首次发生，各执一毒不是说是对等的毒的意思……另外大部分人都有自己的考量，不要觉得别人都被灌输了
你是指这张表中说的Type A中的数据中有“subtyping not performed”和type B中的数据中有“lineage not performed“吗？这些都已经说了是type A、B流感病毒了。如果你是指的其它的内容请把内容贴在这里我们再决定unknown是指哪一种流感病毒不明还是哪一种病毒不明。
我猜你是指下面这个表里的unknown，这个表的标题都说了与流感有关的住院患者的病毒类型，那肯定是流感中的一种了。否则怎么会放在这张表里？
你自己也看得到了图表中每年都有几十例unknown流感病毒患者，难道CDC每年都有不愿公之于众的病毒要掩盖？
LZ简直ZZ，4年的数据你能看到毛的规律来？你翻翻前几年看呢？
这是2013-2014跟今年的对比。
- 第一，老年人2013-2014只占了29.8%，今年是35%。异常不？
- 第二，死亡率2013-2014是3.5%，今年是3.2%。异常不？
- 第三，无基础病身体健康的患者，2013-2014成人是9%，儿童是50.3%，今年成人是7.5%，儿童是52.8%。异常不？
所以2013年的流感病例也包含了新冠？
你还真能找数据。刚刚我仔细看了过去10的数据，发现只有这个2013-14跟今年相似。你就把这两个数据点单独列出来。我去查看了一下2013-14年的新闻。没错，新闻说，那一年的流感是不正常的，就跟今年是不正常的一样。那一年的流感导致了多地的医院出现了药品短缺。
State of the flu: How bad is the 2013-2014 flu season?
The flu is making headlines across the country—and for good reason. The oft-underestimated disease can spread quickly and prove unexpectedly deadly.
The deadly outbreak in North Texas appears to have driven many to get late flu shots, and some pharmacies are now reporting shortages. Similarly, California hospitals are struggling to manage severe flu outbreaks that have claimed the lives of as many as 146 adults under age 65, according to state epidemiologists. By comparison, California had reported only nine flu-related deaths in that age group at this time last year.
https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/blog/2014/01/how-bad-is-the-2013-2014-flu-season
State of the flu: Hospitals struggle with saline shortage Health care providers say that a worsening shortage of saline for IV bags may complicate their ability to care for patients, especially as the demand for saline solution grows during the ongoing flu season. According to the CDC's latest report, which includes data through Jan. 18, influenza-like illness (ILI) activity currently is widespread in 41 states, and 13 states are reporting high levels of ILI activity.
https://forums.huaren.us/editpost.aspx?topicid=2510332&postid=82899152&forumpage=1&pageid=1
2010-2011也有很多相似之处啊 34.3%的老年人，3.1%的致死率，65.6%和18.3%的儿童和成人无基础病身体健康的患者
另外15-16年也很像，除了death percentage略低。
真正异常的是08-09和09-10年，你看看差别有多大（尤其是09-10）
你故意引申得太多。我的猜测当然不一定对，因为我没有直接的信息，但是也不一定错。即便是CDC，也不敢拍着胸脯说，今年的流感里没有新冠病人。
今天你还敢给CDC洗地吗？连CDC自己都不敢洗。你知道CDC为什么说新冠一定会爆发吗？因为他们知道实际情况不是公布出来的样子。就你还傻乎乎信得瓷实。
《华盛顿邮报》2月26日报道援引不愿透露姓名的公共安全专家观点，中国之外，伊朗、意大利、新加坡和韩国疫情已经爆发，是时候考虑在美国范围内加大排查力度了。目前美国本土排查出来的只有14例新冠肺炎确诊病例，很多未被检测的病患，很可能会被列为流感或者简单的感冒。报道写道：“让专家感到害怕的是，当病毒向中国以外地区蔓延时，没人知道美国的情况如何，因为他们（美国政府）根本就不查。”本季度在美
国肆虐的流感，已导致2600万人感染，其中1.4万人死亡。参议院民主党领袖查克·舒默表示，“我们的（美国各地）医院和实验室并没有收到足够的新冠肺炎核酸试剂盒。那些没有试剂盒的，只能将样本送到亚特兰大，无法就地检测，这很浪费时间，而现在病毒正在扩散。”
你这种不能证伪就是证实的态度就是耍流氓了。我不能证明法轮不存在，那么法轮就一定存在。跟神棍有什么区别？既然拿科学数据说话，拜托有点科学精神好不好。
你混淆了科学论文和普通人合理怀疑的区别。作为普通人，在信息缺乏不透明的情况下，试图从已经公开的政府数据中寻找真相的蛛丝马迹。这种怀疑是正当的。就像武汉的死亡数字，任何人都可以合理推测，虽然任何人的推测都不能证实。你可以将我的怀疑看成是谣言。用你的话说，这是一个不能证伪的谣言。它意味着什么？实际上，对于任何谣言，如果能够证伪，政府一定会出面证伪辟谣的。
一语中的
今天的新闻，加州某个患者，一开始是被当成普通肺炎。直到今天才被重新诊断为新冠肺炎。事实胜于雄辩。
The male resident, who has been identified as being in his 50s, was initially thought to have pneumonia, but was transferred to Kaiser Permanente in San Jose where he tested positive for COVID-19.
https://gilroydispatch.com/gilroy-resident-tests-positive-for-covid-19/
吓人啊
西雅图养老院2月19号起26例死亡，只测试了15例
https://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2515586&forumpage=1
各个国家的医疗系统不一样。美国预约看病，不容易交叉感染。美国有负压病床，对肺炎病人的处理比较规范。这些因素让新冠在美国的传染系数和造成的影响跟中国不太一样。即便现在，美国也是将新冠当初流感来宣传和处理的。
楼主你开这个楼的目的是要说因为今年流感青壮年住院和死亡比前两年的数目多而老年人比前两年少，所以很有可能CDC把大量新冠病人统计入流感数据。今天的新闻加州一例“ initially thought to have pneumonia” 后来“tested positive for COVID-19”就能证明CDC把大量新冠病人计入流感统计数据？你懂“initially thought”是什么意思吗？这和CDC计入流感统计数据有什么关系？难道CDC是根据“initially thought”来统计病人感染、住院、死亡数目的？
另外目前因新冠死亡的19例病人有几例是老人几例是青壮年你不知道？美国新冠死亡人数中绝大多数是老人这个事实不正好打你的脸证明你的说法，因为今年流感青壮年死亡的比往年多所以他们得的是新冠，是完全错误的？
说说我身边的一个肺炎
https://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2515580&forumpage=1
菲律宾护士，没有基础病，正常上班，50多岁
上上周末来急诊，呼吸不畅，认为是肺炎，ER 处理了一下回家
过2天再来，呼吸困难，直接进icu, 很快插管
状况继续恶化，上周末死了
中间联系过department of health, 要求测新冠，doh的人也来了，说测不了没kit
因为没测，医院里治疗她的人当然继续上班
早发也好，看看有多少脑残和傻缺
实事求是好吧，今年的流感数据有什么异常？和往年有什么区别？
就是嘛。床铺说了，新冠跟流感没什么不同，注意多洗手就行了。
这话是你说的，不是我。就事论事说，今年流感数据哪里不对了？如果新冠早就爆了同时也感染了流感，现在流感数据会是现在这样？So far因流感住院的病人数量今年都低于往常几年，而且通常二月是流感的高峰期，凭数据说话不是吗？
美国是输入国，病例却是全球第一。这是不合逻辑的。现在美国发现这么多病例，后面还会有更多病例出现，合理的解释只能是，这个病其实早就在美国流传了。美国ICU病房多，地广人稀，看病要预约，所有这些因素让美国积累到挤压医疗系统需要的时间比其它任何国家长很多，所以一开始不容易觉察，都当成流感肺炎处理了。
今天路易斯安那州的州长，在电视采访中说，美国的新冠现在这么严重和普遍，很可能早就有了。
有什么不合逻辑的。厉害国造假数据，很多死了连数字都不算。而且无症状阳性不算确诊。你说的早有多早？肯定晚于武汉吧。不然为何与美国密切交流的北京上海这些一线城市没有爆？
你不要在这里带节奏，就算早，也是晚于武汉的。
今天看到CNN新闻，也谈到同样的问题，就想到这贴了。。
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/27/health/deaths-spike-covid-spread/index.html
Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the team found about 15,000 excess deaths from March 1 to April 4. During the same time, states reported 8,000 deaths from Covid-19. "That is close to double," Dan Weinberger, who studies the epidemiology of infectious diseases at Yale, told CNN.
"What we see is that in many states, you see an increase in influenza-like illnesses, and then a week or two later, you see an increase in deaths due to pneumonia and influenza," Weinberger said. "It provides some confirmation that what we are seeing is related to coronavirus."
Plus, in especially hard-hit states such as New York and New Jersey, where coronavirus is known to have spread widely and infected many people, overall deaths were far in excess in what would normally have been expected in March.
"In New York City, this discrepancy was even more stark, with three to four times as many excess all-cause deaths as pneumonia and influenza deaths," the team wrote.