All things political. Coronavirus Edition. (24 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 25 (members: 0, guests: 25)

    Maxp

    Well-known member
    Joined
    May 17, 2019
    Messages
    495
    Reaction score
    848
    Offline
    I fear we are really going to be in a bad place due to the obvious cuts to the federal agencies that deal with infectious disease, but also the negative effect the Affordable Care act has had on non urban hospitals. Our front line defenses are ineffectual and our ability to treat the populous is probably at an all time low. Factor in the cost of healthcare and I can see our system crashing. What do you think about the politics of this virus?
     
    UncleTrvlingJim said:
    Something to keep in mind. People who post on message boards are the more hard core "believers" -- there is a certain amount of insanity or hubris that comes into play. Arguing with strangers on the internet.
    Click to expand...

    I thought about that the other day - I have to actually go on to the internet to find people with views that I disagree with so strongly.

    IRL, I avoid political discussions for the most part but especially if I think their views are completely without merit. I can't think of anything more tedious than entertaining a discussion with someone I think is absolutely wrong, with whom I have no common ground and who I believe will not change their mind.

    A few months ago I was at a casino and a drunk lady came and sat between a friend of mine and me. She said she wanted to talk to us, "but no religion or politics." I said I would drink to that.

    Less than 5 minutes later I hear "Hitler" come up in the conversation. I just laughed and asked, "how the Hell did we go from 'no politics' to 'Hitler' that damn fast?"
     
    lurk said:
    If you'd speak for yourself, I wouldn't have to speak for you. Your need to deflect attention rather than respond to a very straightforward topic speaks volumes. If UncleTrvlingJim has no problem doing it, why can't you? I wonder what the difference is?
    Click to expand...

    I have no idea what you are ranting about now. I think I spelled out my thoughts in such detail that you could follow along. You seem blinded by rage for some reason though.
     
    Wow guys let's talk about that virus thing on the virus thread.


    I think I just read entirely too much about what we all already know.

    On a side note Pink Floyd Live At Pompeii

    Is free for one day only today to help with the coronavirus fight.

    www.express.co.uk

    Pink Floyd Live At Pompeii concert released for one day only – WATCH

    PINK FLOYD Live At Pompeii concert has been shared by the band for fans in lockdown today.
    www.express.co.uk www.express.co.uk

    If you have never seen it do it is spectacular.
     
    Yesterday we had the highest daily cases confirmed in the US, about 38.7k cases. That tells me we have not peaked. Some could be due to the recent parades. We may be seeing increasing cases for a few more days. States that are opening will probably start surging. We may need to produce more ventilators and associated medical equipment.
     
    Lapaz said:
    Yesterday we had the highest daily cases confirmed in the US, about 38.7k cases. That tells me we have not peaked. Some could be due to the recent parades. We may be seeing increasing cases for a few more days. States that are opening will probably start surging. We may need to produce more ventilators and associated medical equipment.
    Click to expand...

    Three weeks ago the top models predicted Mississippi would need 1,100 ventilators today. The actual number in use is 74.
     
    Beach Friends said:
    I have no idea what you are ranting about now. I think I spelled out my thoughts in such detail that you could follow along. You seem blinded by rage for some reason though.
    Click to expand...
    You haven't spelled out anything in a reply to me. Perhaps you replied to my post while quoting someone else instead, and I missed it? If so, could you kindly point me in that direction so that I can read it?
     
    lurk said:
    You haven't spelled out anything in a reply to me. Perhaps you replied to my post while quoting someone else instead, and I missed it? If so, could you kindly point me in that direction so that I can read it?
    Click to expand...

    Go to post 2664. It's the same post UTJ quoted.
     
    UncleTrvlingJim said:
    I think this is very true, and worth remembering.



    I went back and read the thread and I think Farb was responding to the post saying they expect Trump supporters to start drinking bleach or something, and he was responding to the idea that it was only Trump supporters who would do something that stupid.
    Click to expand...
    Well he replied to my joke about if any of the True believers would follow his directions. So, I feel like that's being a bit generous. But, Farb can explain it, if he wants to.
     
    Guys, no one cares that you can't get along. Either stop talking about each other and get back to the virus, or please leave this thread.

    It's not about you. It's not about any of us. It's about all of us and the massive damage (life and economic) and fear across the country.
     
    Beach Friends said:
    A month or so ago there was a fear, based on some outrageous predictions, that there would be a shortage of ventilators. Those models were, as we now know, wrong.
    Click to expand...
    This isn’t true. The models predicted what would happen based on the data that they had at the time.

    We made drastic changes across the country to prevent what the models were showing.

    What the models were showing was prevented, and new models continue to demonstrate a downward trend and the overall efficacy of the mitigation steps taken.

    Thanks for playing.
     
    wardorican said:
    Guys, no one cares that you can't get along. Either stop talking about each other and get back to the virus, or please leave this thread.

    It's not about you. It's not about any of us. It's about all of us and the massive damage (life and economic) and fear across the country.
    Click to expand...

    On that note, I heard (in passing) on a news broadcast a couple of days ago that it is starting to look like many more than originally anticipated have been infected, and that it would dramatically lower the mortality rate. Anyone else hear/read this?
     
    I'm a bit mixed on allowing certain businesses to open. it does seem like they are at least trying to be safe. Spacing out chairs, wearing a mask, cleaning between folks. But, look at the picture on the top of the article. The elderly barber isn't wearing his mask correctly.

    www.nytimes.com

    Businesses Tiptoe Into a World of Masks, Gloves and Wary Customers (Published 2020)

    Some states have taken tentative steps toward reopening businesses shuttered by the coronavirus. In Georgia, it meant a few residents were out getting haircuts and their tongues pierced.
    www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

    1587785920909.png
     
    Humperdoo said:
    On that note, I heard (in passing) on a news broadcast a couple of days ago that it is starting to look like many more than originally anticipated have been infected, and that it would dramatically lower the mortality rate. Anyone else hear/read this?
    Click to expand...
    There have been at least three studies that I'm aware of, in LA, Miami and NY (NYC??) that were testing people for anti bodies and used statistical sampling to estimate that many more people were potentially infected.

    The NY testing might be more meaningful, but I haven't looked into it much.

    The Cali and Miami tests used volunteers from what I understand, so there is a potential bias of people who thought they may have had it (were really sick) volunteered, so a higher percentage of positive tests would be found, so extrapolating that into the general population is problematic. Also, the testing they do, I think has a small % in false positive. Not a big deal when you test tens of thousands of people. A huge deal when you test 800 people and try to extrapolate it to a population of 20-50 million.

    So, my look at the data is this. I think it's pretty clear we had / have more people infected than we are counting who have had or currently have minor symptoms. That's good. So, the fatality rate may be lower. However, it is still very high, and the number of deaths is still higher than usual. We talked about it a bit on the thread on SR, and my point was to look at the death rate. The body count is still far beyond the flu. So, potentially less deadly of a disease, but not as much as we'd like to hope. I wouldn't kid ourselves about this not really being that bad.
     
    wardorican said:
    There have been at least three studies that I'm aware of, in LA, Miami and NY (NYC??) that were testing people for anti bodies and used statistical sampling to estimate that many more people were potentially infected.

    The NY testing might be more meaningful, but I haven't looked into it much.

    The Cali and Miami tests used volunteers from what I understand, so there is a potential bias of people who thought they may have had it (were really sick) volunteered, so a higher percentage of positive tests would be found, so extrapolating that into the general population is problematic. Also, the testing they do, I think has a small % in false positive. Not a big deal when you test tens of thousands of people. A huge deal when you test 800 people and try to extrapolate it to a population of 20-50 million.

    So, my look at the data is this. I think it's pretty clear we had / have more people infected than we are counting who have had or currently have minor symptoms. That's good. So, the fatality rate may be lower. However, it is still very high, and the number of deaths is still higher than usual. We talked about it a bit on the thread on SR, and my point was to look at the death rate. The body count is still far beyond the flue. So, potentially less deadly of a disease, but not as much as we'd like to hope. I wouldn't kid ourselves about this not really being that bad.
    Click to expand...

    Copy that. I was locked out of that SR EE thread. So I didn’t see that.
    Thank you.

    As a funny aside, being almost completely blind now, I read ‘studies’ as ‘suicides’ and was wondering what that had to do with COVID mortality rate. Lol
     
    brandon said:
    This isn’t true. The models predicted what would happen based on the data that they had at the time.

    We made drastic changes across the country to prevent what the models were showing.

    What the models were showing was prevented, and new models continue to demonstrate a downward trend and the overall efficacy of the mitigation steps taken.

    Thanks for playing.
    Click to expand...

    Yeah, that might be a cool argument if the models did not take mitigation into account. They did both - with and without. The numbers were exaggerated even on the models with mitigation.

    It is true, however, that the data they used was wrong. Now we know better, so there is no reason to continue as if we don't.

    Furthermore, our stockpile numbers have changed. We may soon become the world's leading provider of ventilators based on ramped up production. Some people are just going to have to get used to that idea.
     
    There's a significantly higher number of people who have had this than have been confirmed as positive. That's never been a question.
     
    Humperdoo said:
    On that note, I heard (in passing) on a news broadcast a couple of days ago that it is starting to look like many more than originally anticipated have been infected, and that it would dramatically lower the mortality rate. Anyone else hear/read this?
    Click to expand...
    Yes, there is some evidence trickling in that the mortality rate will not be ridiculously high. New York currently has a mortality rate of about 40%, but their recent antibody tests of 3000 samples reveal that about 10 times as many people as reported have the virus. That suggests that about 3M people in New York have been infected. Yet they've lost over 21k people already out of 277k confirmed cases, and only about 30k have recovered. Since they still have about 224k active cases, it is reasonable to infer that at least another 20 to 60k will die among those 224k. So if 40 to 80k die among 3M infected, that's a 1.3 to 2.6% mortality rate, which is in line with what experts have been assessing for a couple of months now. That mortality rate justifies the actions taken to prevent more widespread infections in a short timeframe.

    One problem with the antibody tests is that infected people will have positive antibody results. Since it can take 14 days to develop symptoms, who's to say that most of those 3M won't develop symptoms? People assume that the presence of antibodies means they already beat the virus, but since this virus doesn't act like most diseases, since it takes so long to develop symptoms, I think that is a bad assumption.
     
    Last edited:
    Beach Friends said:
    Yeah, that might be a cool argument if the models did not take mitigation into account. They did both - with and without. The numbers were exaggerated even on the models with mitigation.

    It is true, however, that the data they used was wrong. Now we know better, so there is no reason to continue as if we don't.

    Furthermore, our stockpile numbers have changed. We may soon become the world's leading provider of ventilators based on ramped up production. Some people are just going to have to get used to that idea.
    Click to expand...
    You need to be more specific, because there are many models. The Whitehouse has cited the University of Washington's models the most. I haven't studied it. I know that so far we have used less ventilators than some feared we would need, but I also see our cases still rising in some places. Though New York may have enough, that equipment will probably be needed in the U.S. as cases continue to rise. Also, clearly in these types of life or death models, it is better to be conservative, than to assume rosier scenarios. In any event, tell us more about the model that was so far off?
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom