After death of Joshua Dean & John Barnett, their lawyers are concerned about the possibility that around 10 more Boeing whistleblowers may suffer the same fate.
Yes if you’re including the entire population (which is not how stats works) as his demographic is exponentially more at risk than many others (age, onset of pneumonia, etc)
You don’t just take the entire population and calculate the odds that they will contract and/or die of something. For instance, I could trivialize bike injuries/deaths in the US because countless people do not commute regularly on their bikes. Hell tens of millions don’t even have one and haven’t ridden a bike since they were children. The stat isn’t super useful unless we are discussing how many regular cyclists get hurt. Otherwise countless non-cyclists dilute the useful information - if they don’t ride bikes, they aren’t at risk at all. And that’s not even taking into account locale. Different population densities,topographies, etc. have different risks. But we can set that aside for now as I think you likely get what I’m driving at there.
MRSA affects more specific demographics and conditions. Somebody who is older who contracts pneumonia and enters a hospital is far more likely than the average population to contract it - and it has a 10-20% lethality which is extremely high - so their risk has to be assessed in that context.
If we only compared it against the general population, then hospitals would simply go “well in the grand scheme of things not many people die of MRSA.“ When what they’re (correctly) saying is “if you are elderly and have pneumonia we need to really watch out for MRSA.” Because that is a real risk.
At 45 he’s not elderly but he’s within the range we see with MRSA unfortunately and pneumonia is a huge trigger for it (compromised immune system open to secondary infection). It’s incredibly resistant to antibiotics/cleaning supplies and is a real killer. Because hospitals clean so much it’s actually more likely to happen there than in “the real world“ because it gets selected out.
So he isn’t super young (least contributing factor), he has pneumonia (big contributing factor), and is in a hospital (where it almost exclusively occurs). His odds were higher than that of the general population the same way if you go skydiving you have a higher chance of dying from falling to your death than the average population.
I’ve already written out the numbers in multiple comments. 50,000-100,000 cases a year, 5,000-10,000 deaths a year. Not everyone gets pneumonia every year, not everyone is equally healthy/unhealthy or has other factors that can make it more likely, not everyone is the same age, etc. So you can’t just apply this to the entire country. What the exact number is is not critical to understanding that. For the same reason not everybody has to worry about being killed on their bike on the way to work. Because not everybody rides a bike to work. I don’t need to show you numbers for everything in the bike claim, it is true/obvious at face value. Unless we have reason to debate whether or not literally every person bikes to work. Do you see my point? Every American is not equally susceptible to contracting MRSA at any given time. I can’t give you the exact number, but I think we can agree the “eligible” population is not anywhere near the total population.
The number of cases and the number of deaths associated, as well pneumonia/MRSA infection/ while hospitalized, is well documented. You can find stuff from the NIH and beyond about this. It’s a very serious issue that hospitals have never been able to truly fix. A cursory search would show you this, I’m sure there are a dozen major articles you could find in no time.
We do ourselves no favors by sounding like conspiracy nutjobs who are uninterested in facts. When they go low, we should retain the high road, imho.
Edit: this… basically means tangentially what I had intended to say, so it is better off to be deleted, though I will leave it as strikethrough for the historical record (I really hate all those “deleted” messages, and don’t want to contribute one of my own too!).
I apologize for my wording - I agree with you that I was out of line. There was some point I was trying to make, about the need to be cautious with our wording, but somehow I ended up doing the exact thing I was trying to warn about, didn’t I? Fwiw I don’t actually think that you suck at all - I was just really, Really, REALLY bad at expressing myself there.:-) Thank you for not returning the favor in like manner.
I did do the math on it and the second guy only had a 1 in 3630 chance of dying of natural causes in that time window.
Yes if you’re including the entire population (which is not how stats works) as his demographic is exponentially more at risk than many others (age, onset of pneumonia, etc)
https://lemmy.world/comment/9809397
I admit I am not a stats guy. Please tell me what I did wrong in my math. Totally open to being corrected here.
You don’t just take the entire population and calculate the odds that they will contract and/or die of something. For instance, I could trivialize bike injuries/deaths in the US because countless people do not commute regularly on their bikes. Hell tens of millions don’t even have one and haven’t ridden a bike since they were children. The stat isn’t super useful unless we are discussing how many regular cyclists get hurt. Otherwise countless non-cyclists dilute the useful information - if they don’t ride bikes, they aren’t at risk at all. And that’s not even taking into account locale. Different population densities,topographies, etc. have different risks. But we can set that aside for now as I think you likely get what I’m driving at there.
MRSA affects more specific demographics and conditions. Somebody who is older who contracts pneumonia and enters a hospital is far more likely than the average population to contract it - and it has a 10-20% lethality which is extremely high - so their risk has to be assessed in that context.
If we only compared it against the general population, then hospitals would simply go “well in the grand scheme of things not many people die of MRSA.“ When what they’re (correctly) saying is “if you are elderly and have pneumonia we need to really watch out for MRSA.” Because that is a real risk.
At 45 he’s not elderly but he’s within the range we see with MRSA unfortunately and pneumonia is a huge trigger for it (compromised immune system open to secondary infection). It’s incredibly resistant to antibiotics/cleaning supplies and is a real killer. Because hospitals clean so much it’s actually more likely to happen there than in “the real world“ because it gets selected out.
So he isn’t super young (least contributing factor), he has pneumonia (big contributing factor), and is in a hospital (where it almost exclusively occurs). His odds were higher than that of the general population the same way if you go skydiving you have a higher chance of dying from falling to your death than the average population.
Ok can you give me an actual number?
deleted by creator
I’ve already written out the numbers in multiple comments. 50,000-100,000 cases a year, 5,000-10,000 deaths a year. Not everyone gets pneumonia every year, not everyone is equally healthy/unhealthy or has other factors that can make it more likely, not everyone is the same age, etc. So you can’t just apply this to the entire country. What the exact number is is not critical to understanding that. For the same reason not everybody has to worry about being killed on their bike on the way to work. Because not everybody rides a bike to work. I don’t need to show you numbers for everything in the bike claim, it is true/obvious at face value. Unless we have reason to debate whether or not literally every person bikes to work. Do you see my point? Every American is not equally susceptible to contracting MRSA at any given time. I can’t give you the exact number, but I think we can agree the “eligible” population is not anywhere near the total population.
The number of cases and the number of deaths associated, as well pneumonia/MRSA infection/ while hospitalized, is well documented. You can find stuff from the NIH and beyond about this. It’s a very serious issue that hospitals have never been able to truly fix. A cursory search would show you this, I’m sure there are a dozen major articles you could find in no time.
We do ourselves no favors by sounding like conspiracy nutjobs who are uninterested in facts. When they go low, we should retain the high road, imho.Edit: this… basically means tangentially what I had intended to say, so it is better off to be deleted, though I will leave it as strikethrough for the historical record (I really hate all those “deleted” messages, and don’t want to contribute one of my own too!).
Yeah yeah I suck, get in line and take a number. Now, will attacking me bring those two murdered men back to life?
I apologize for my wording - I agree with you that I was out of line. There was some point I was trying to make, about the need to be cautious with our wording, but somehow I ended up doing the exact thing I was trying to warn about, didn’t I? Fwiw I don’t actually think that you suck at all - I was just really, Really, REALLY bad at expressing myself there.:-) Thank you for not returning the favor in like manner.
You good. Enjoy your weekend
You too!:-)