Almost twice as many Republicans than Democrats died of Covid, study says

[Couchpotato]

Ah. So your ignorance, combined with laziness has resulted in skepticism.

This isn’t the researcher’s fault. Its yours.

It doesn’t matter if you sign up for it, because we both know that you wouldn’t understand it anyway.

Ok

 

[Marener]

Ok

Lol, yeah.

 

[Couchpotato]

Lol, yeah.

Yeah Im just tired of asking for something you for whatever reason refuse to provide. So. Ok. Bye Felicia.

 

[Mac-7]

Hmm...now this should be an eye opener for some..but--it won't be.
I see this as a purely Darwinian exercise---sad but inevitable.

https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w30512/w30512.pdf

Political affiliation has emerged as a potential risk factor for COVID-19, amid evidence that Republican-leaning counties have had higher COVID-19 death rates than Democrat- leaning counties and evidence of a link between political party affiliation and vaccination views. This study constructs an individual-level dataset with political affiliation and excess death rates during the COVID-19 pandemic via a linkage of 2017 voter registration in Ohio and Florida to mortality data from 2018 to 2021. We estimate substantially higher excess death rates for registered Republicans when compared to registered Democrats, with almost all of the difference concentrated in the period after vaccines were widely available in our study states. Overall, the excess death rate for Republicans was 5.4 percentage points (pp), or 76%, higher than the excess death rate for Democrats. Post- vaccines, the excess death rate gap between Republicans and Democrats widened from 1.6 pp (22% of the Democrat excess death rate) to 10.4 pp (153% of the Democrat excess death rate). The gap in excess death rates between Republicans and Democrats is concentrated in counties with low vaccination rates and only materializes after vaccines became widely available.


Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused over one million deaths in the United
States [6], leading to considerable interest in identifying risk factors for COVID-19 mortality.
Political affiliation has emerged as one potentially significant risk factor, amid evidence that
Republican-leaning counties have had higher COVID-19 death rates than Democrat-leaning
counties [11, 14]. But it is unknown whether this county-level association — which may be
subject to the ecological fallacy [12] — persists at the individual level. Prior research has also
established differences in vaccination attitudes and social distancing based on political party
affiliation [1, 9, 2, 8, 13], but it has been more difficult thus far to establish corresponding
links to health outcomes due to data limitations. This study overcomes that challenge by
linking voter registration data in Ohio and Florida to mortality data to assess the individual-
level association between political party affiliation and excess mortality during the COVID-19
pandemic. We estimate higher excess death rates for registered Republicans when compared
to registered Democrats after vaccines were widely available — and not before — and these
differences were concentrated in counties with lower vaccination rates.

If you believe that then you probably already own a bridge in Brooklyn

 

[Marener]

Yeah Im just tired of asking for something you for whatever reason refuse to provide. So. Ok. Bye Felicia.

I provided the link with everything you asked for. Then what happened?

 

[Marener]

If you believe that then you probably already own a bridge in Brooklyn

What is so unbelievable about it?

 

[Couchpotato]

I provided the link with everything you asked for. Then what happened?

You provided a link to something I'd have to sign up for and log into. Post the how. You could have done that twice over in the amount of effort you've spent avoiding doing it. Im not doing the work for you. You're like dealing with an entitled teenager.

 

[Mac-7]

What is so unbelievable about it?

it smells like a lib lie

 

[Marener]

You provided a link to something I'd have to sign up for and log into. Post the how. You could have done that twice over in the amount of effort you've spent avoiding doing it. Im not doing the work for you. You're like dealing with an entitled teenager.

Oh Christ, you’re the one demanding an explanation and making zero effort to find out for yourself.

You’re the one asking me to do the work for you.

You won’t even take two minutes to get a login for the website. If you think that’s too much work for you, I got bad news about how much work you’re going to take to understand their statistical model.

 

[Marener]

it smells like a lib lie

So you have no factual basis?

 

[Mac-7]

So you have no factual basis?

Neither do you

 

[Marener]

Neither do you

Uh, dude. You’re in a thread discussing a paper using data and statistics to say just that.

We have lots of others bits of data too.

 

[Mac-7]

Uh, dude. You’re in a thread discussing a paper using data and statistics to say just that.

We have lots of others bits of data too.

Any lib who publishes a “study” allegedly comparing repubs and dems is a partisan hack and not to be trusted

 

[Marener]

Any lib who publishes a “study” allegedly comparing repubs and dems is a partisan hack and not to be trusted

Or maybe you’re the partisan hack who doesn’t like hearing the truth?

 

[Couchpotato]

Oh Christ, you’re the one demanding an explanation and making zero effort to find out for yourself.

You’re the one asking me to do the work for you.

You won’t even take two minutes to get a login for the website. If you think that’s too much work for you, I got bad news about how much work you’re going to take to understand their statistical model.

You made the assertion not me.

 

[Marener]

You made the assertion not me.

The paper’s methodology says they accounted for age in their statistical model.

I provided the section that says so.

You imply that you don’t believe them, but we have no idea why.

 

[Couchpotato]

The paper’s methodology says they accounted for age in their statistical model.

I provided the section that says so.

You imply that you don’t believe them, but we have no idea why.

oh “they said so”. Well. In that case.

 

[Marener]

oh “they said so”. Well. In that case.

Are you accusing them of lying?

 

[Faun]

If you dont want to have an actual discussion and just want to fling poo have at it.

LOL

There was no "poo" flung.

The study showed Republicans dying from covid at a rate of about 100% greater than Democrats. You countered that by trying to remove the political aspect, ultimately saying it was "registered" Republicans and not reflective of how they voted. To that, I was able to show 93% of Republicans voted for Trump and 7% of Republicans voted for Biden.

 

[Couchpotato]

Are you accusing them of lying?

Im not accusing anyone of anything. But if you make an assertion it's on you to back up that assertion. If you wont/cant then you have to accept that people are going to question that assertion.

"The coefficients regression adjust for year-monthby-age-bin-by-county differences. The error bars report the 95% confidence interval. sharp (and increasingly) negative effect toward the end of sample. This suggests that during the period after vaccines were widely available, areas with larger take-up of vaccines saw much smaller excess death rate gaps between Republicans and Democrats (even after adjusting for county and age differences)."

"Political party affiliation was associated with excess death rates at the individual level during the initial years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Registered Republicans in Florida and Ohio had higher excess death rates than registered Democrats, driven by a large mortality gap in 5 the period after all adults were eligible for vaccines. These results adjust for county-by-age differences in excess deaths during the pandemic, suggesting that there were within-age-bycounty differences in excess death associated with political party affiliation. "

"Statistical models adjusted for differences in excess death rates by calendar quarter, county, and age. "

These are the sections I could find where they talk about "adjusting for age". What are they adjusting? Thats a very vague statement. Im not saying they are being vague on purpose to try and hide something, but it's vague either way.

Your assertion is that the "adjustment" they made accounts for the fact that as we get older, we become more "conservative" or there are at least more conservatives in the older cohorts than the younger. Im saying ok. Show me how you did that.