starting strength gym
Page 164 of 3004 FirstFirst ... 641141541621631641651661742142646641164 ... LastLast
Results 1,631 to 1,640 of 30039

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #1631
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    660

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    The author of that article on nosocomial infection writes like they learned the word "nosocomial" a few days ago. The risk it poses is blindingly obvious to everyone involved. It was a motivating factor for the lockdown, not an unintended consequence of it.

  2. #1632
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Provo, Utah
    Posts
    520

    Default

    I spoke to a judge today in a state we all know about who was quite concerned, "The entire civil code has been re-written in the past 21 days." He was extremely worried with the tsunami of bankruptcies, domestic violence, and crime from all of these job losses that will end up in his courtroom. Most troubling, he said, are the lines that are now forming for people needing food which indicates we are at the tipping point of civil unrest.

  3. #1633
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Lakeland, FL
    Posts
    3,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CommanderFun View Post
    That's the feeling I have. I'm looking forward to antibody tests being proliferated, I think a lot of people are gonna look really goddamn stupid once they are.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark E. Hurling View Post
    Any data that contradicts Fauci and his models will be suppressed by the media. If it's not reported, it never happened.
    My understanding is that they are doing a test with only 10,000 people, which seems pretty damned low when we have money to build field hospitals for nobody and send ships for nobody and such.

    This will be easy to screw up, like they have all their other shitty data, with such low numbers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Question of the month: How do they find people who want to be these kind of cops?
    The combination of military vets who still want to be at war and dudes who were bullied as kids and want revenge.

  4. #1634
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    32

    Default

    IMG_0736.jpg

    Wow look at this brave decision the town next to me made.

    Banning a bonfire in your backyard, complete with a number to call to rat out you neighbor.

    Stunning and brave. Truly heroic. Saving lives.

    I came across this on my facebook feed, luckily the sentiment in the comments was disgust and confusion. There were a few people licking the governments boots, but it was mostly people saying "Uh? Wtf? Are you serious?"

    Should we ban flowers since I have allergies and get a runny nose? Should we ban gasoline powered cars that are pumping emissions into the air 24/7?

  5. #1635
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    1,003

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    The author of that article on nosocomial infection writes like they learned the word "nosocomial" a few days ago. The risk it poses is blindingly obvious to everyone involved. It was a motivating factor for the lockdown, not an unintended consequence of it.
    Regardless of whether what he's stating is common knowledge, and without focusing on blame for our predicament, what do you think of his claim that current policy isn't rational given the evidence?

    It seems rational to put a stop to large mass gatherings, but is it rational to continue to proceed like this?

    Take this quote:

    Should we only ban public gatherings? Should we only allow essential work in supermarkets or banks? Could we isolate those most at risk and allow others to move around? There is a spectrum of choices. How badly hurt will the economy be hurt by each measure and what impact on the spread will each have?

    Given the extreme differences in how the virus affects the young and the old, it is worth asking if a countrywide lockdown is the right policy.
    Do we have evidence that North American governments are considering these questions rationally? Their actions derive from the best models they had at the time, but these models, from what I understand, were not designed to take into account the dynamics that the article focuses on.

    Take the imperial college model. Their transmission model (admittedly, the only part of the paper I haven't skimmed) is impressive, but it doesn't take into account the idea that hospitals themselves can function as super-spreaders.

    This seems like a critical oversight, given that policy decisions were made based on this model.

  6. #1636
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    172

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    No, I was trying to say what I said.

    I cannot believe you still do not understand this. Or maybe you do and just really mangled your version of what you think I said.

    The CDC totals on Rob’s page are all the deaths *known* on whatever date. They are what they are and they don’t get updated retrospectively. The update *is* the next total number known on the next day.

    And so yeah, because if reporting lag, you can NEVER take the total number of deaths *known*on day X, subtract the number *known* on day X-1 and call that a daily death count for day X. Because some deaths that happened on day X-2 (or X-3,...), for example, weren’t known on day X-1 but *are* known on day X. Plus many reports for deaths that occurred on day X won’t be at the CDC on day X. You just get a meaningless mess when you do that.

    If I want to know how many people died today, I need to add up all the reports of deaths that occurred today, ie whose reports are DATED today. These will reach the CDC over a period of 1-2 weeks, so the numbers before then are always at least somewhat incomplete. That’s why separate data sets are kept for this type of statistical analysis.
    5th time of asking:

    In which State do you live Lazygun?

    A reminder of the definition of Cowardice, Oxford English Dictionary:

    “A person who is not brave or who does not have the courage to do things that other people do not think are especially difficult“.

  7. #1637
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    2,422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Waskis View Post
    Interestingly, the deaths in Sweden (the one that didn't lock everything down) look like this for the past few days: 114, 96, 106, 77, 17, 12.
    I'm far from being an expert in tallying this, but Sweden has 114 deaths today. It seems to me, when I look at their stats on Worldometer, that they seem to have a decrease in daily reported deaths on the weekends and holidays. Then some kind of spike at the beginning of each week, then another drop as the weekend comes and so on. Looks like this 77, 17, 12 drop was a result of the holidays, and the current spike is due to more deaths being reported once the weekly tallying starts. Or whatever. Also, I've yet to find this 3154 number for the US, today is supposed to be the worst yet, with a little over 2200 deaths.

  8. #1638
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    I haven't changed my numbers and my arguments once
    Haven’t changed your numbers? You’re all over the map.

    First you said “The seasonal flu typically kills around 30,000 people each year”.
    Then, when we had 22,000 deaths you said "you already have as many deaths *right now* as in a fairly standard flu season".
    I called you out and said, “The mean estimated deaths for 2010-2019 is just over 33,000”.
    You then doubled down and said, “That makes the current COVID-19 numbers "pretty typical" for a flu season in my book -- certainly not atypical.”

    --- So what’s a typical/standard flu season? Is it 30K, or just somewhere between zero and infinity?

    Your argument has flip-flopped so many times I don't even know what it is anymore.

    Way back when, said “my view of this situation is data-driven and quantitative”.

    --- Got it, you have firmly established your position as someone who relies on data to make decisions.

    But then you made a bunch of posts and got called out for using phrases like, “This is almost certainly true… The need for a ventilator will usually be… I haven't been able to find the exact numbers… I think I found one very small study… I also recall another Chinese study… which presumably means… But both of these suggest… reasonable first approximation”.

    --- So maybe you don’t need firm data to draw conclusions and make inferences.

    But then you said “But we have concrete *data* from multiple countries about the infectiousness and lethality of the virus, so we *know*”.

    --- So concrete data is now important again.

    But then you made a prediction on fatalities “with obviously significant uncertainty”.

    --- So maybe the data isn’t that concrete after all and that’s not important.

    But then you said “you can NEVER take the total number of deaths *known*on day X, subtract the number *known* on day X-1 and call that a daily death count for day X. … You just get a meaningless mess when you do that.”

    --- So we’re back to needing really exact data.

    But then you pivoted again and data integrity became less important when you said “Obviously, this is just a back-of-the-envelope calculation to gain some intuition… happens at ~70%… roughly 50%... typical IFR of 0.07%... around or below 0.01%... between 19 million and 68 million… relatively low… a large percentage… about 230 million… around 5.7x… maybe 3.8x… around 21.7x higher… around 920,000…”

    --- So do we need perfectly accurate data or not to draw conclusions professor? Make up your damn mind.

  9. #1639
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    RS WY
    Posts
    980

    Default

    My point is simply that there is no reason to think from this that 15% is an upper limit.
    It was not reasoned that 15% is an upper limit.

    But to be more clear since clearly that has been an issue of late:

    15% infection rate seems like a reasonable weighted average across all applicable demographics (population density, age) based on transmission rates of similar pathogens and available datasets. Of course the rates are likely higher amongst older folks and in more densely populated areas like NYC, but are similarly lower amongst children and in low density areas like good ‘ole WY.

    Let’s crunch some more numbers:

    Imperial predicted US deaths: 2.2M
    NY predicted deaths: 14,542
    WY predicted deaths: 34

    Again using .5% IFR:
    Imperial calculated infection rate: 134%
    NY calculated infection rate: 15%
    WY calculated infection rate: 1.1%

    Let’s investigate what IFR would be required to produce 2.2M deaths at various infection rates:

    Formula: IFR = deaths / (pop * inf rate)

    100% infection rate = .6% IFR
    50% infection rate = 1.3% IFR
    15% infection rate = 4.5% IFR

    For reference the Spanish flu pandemic had an infection rate of 25-30% and an IFR of ~2%...

  10. #1640
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    536

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by jklymus View Post
    IMG_0736.jpg

    Wow look at this brave decision the town next to me made.

    Banning a bonfire in your backyard, complete with a number to call to rat out you neighbor.

    Stunning and brave. Truly heroic. Saving lives.

    I came across this on my facebook feed, luckily the sentiment in the comments was disgust and confusion. There were a few people licking the governments boots, but it was mostly people saying "Uh? Wtf? Are you serious?"

    Should we ban flowers since I have allergies and get a runny nose? Should we ban gasoline powered cars that are pumping emissions into the air 24/7?
    I am not on Facebook because its garbage, but I would caution anyone taking a Facebook feed post as truth. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But on this particular image I am intrigued by the city "asking" residents not to burn, yet providing a number to report those who do.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •