starting strength gym
Page 184 of 3004 FirstFirst ... 841341741821831841851861942342846841184 ... LastLast
Results 1,831 to 1,840 of 30039

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #1831
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    Quote Originally Posted by Soule View Post
    Isn’t the CFR for the flu typically based on a year of data? Wouldn’t the trend be for the CFR for covid19 to decrease as more data accumulates over the year?
    Every strain of flu is a different virus, technically, and will have a different CFR. So the CFR of 0.1% cited for the seasonal flu is basically an average for the flu. Some years it is more virulent than others.

    The CFR for covid does seem to be trending down, because CFR depends on having the ability to accurately determine cases, so you need a test, when tests are scarce, mostly very ill people are tested, and more of them die, because they are very ill, so the CFR is higher. If you are testing people who with mild or modest illness, less of them will die, so your CFR will be lower. We have seen the likely CFR for covid trend down from like 5% to near 1%, and it looks like that’s where it’s settling, now that we have more available tests and can decide if mildly ill people have covid or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Soule View Post
    I would think that covid19 would statistically be more fatal during flu season when more people are sick from other seasonal ailments (the flu) and these deaths are being attributed to covid19. A full years worth of data must cause the CFR to decrease. Lets not forget the shortage of ventilators and the situation in New York. I don’t see how this wouldn’t artificially increase the CFR during the onset of the pandemic.
    CFR will vary based on the environment, it is only partially determined by the virulence properties of the virus itself. If one population has lots of comorbidities and no access to supportive treatment, more of them will die, and the CFR will be higher than in a population with the opposite conditions. Same illness, different CFRs.

    The shortage of ventilators does probably raise the fatality rate in affected areas. This is the reason that we are trying to “flatten the curve”, which is an attempt to spread the infections out over time so we are not all sick at once and taking up all the ICU beds. Yes, the purpose is specifically to reduce the CFR. We want fewer people to die, if possible. You can argue endlessly about how much we should spend to do so, but that’s the basic idea.

  2. #1832
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dillon Spencer View Post
    I understand that you start by saying you're not opposed to the idea in principle, but then go on to compare an effort to help victims of domestic abuse to the Gestapo... You don't want to be misconstrued, but how exactly is that supposed to be construed? There's quite a gulf between those two stances.

    Domestic violence is notoriously hard to catch, as it happens in the home and is underreported by victims. Earlier posters have pointed to reports of domestic violence being on the rise in various parts of the US since the lockdown. Why would we expect it to be different there? I don't know the exact lockdown situation in the Czech Republic right now, but from the sounds of the article the only people that may be in a position to spot the signs (besides family members) are postal workers and delivery people. For the most part it just sounds like they're receiving training on how to spot the signs, and direction to keep their eyes peeled. They're not kicking down doors and performing warrantless searches. If they think they spot something in the course of doing their regular job, they're receiving guidance on whether to refer someone to an app with resources, or if the situation warrants reporting to the police.

    I mean, I'm a teacher. I've received training on how to spot signs of abuse, and am required by law to report it if I suspect anything or a student says something. I've never had to, but I have colleagues that have. It's something we take incredibly seriously, and certainly don't do on a whim. The legal requirement to report exists in my province, and I'm pretty sure the rest of them are the same. There's damn near a million of us in the country. Doctors, I know, have the same requirement. That's a whole lot of snitches just waiting to turn in their neighbours, but despite how I'm sure many of you feel about Canadia, we thus far remain concentration camp free.

    To be clear, I'm sure you don't believe domestic abusers should be protected. I'm just pushing back because I feel like a lot of people are looking for tyranny around every corner these days. I fully support being vigilant about government overreach, but I think your outrage and disappointment is better spent elsewhere. I don't know about various professional requirements to report abuse in the US, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are already millions of people that are legally required to watch for abuse and report it. You (and others) probably just haven't thought about it until now because you haven't had reason to.

    To me, Cody Annino getting snitched on for going in to clean and maintain his own gym has far more of a Gestapo-esque stench to it than this. I know we've already proven Godwin's law a few times here (although less than I'd have expected in 182 pages. Great job team!), but let's not get too cavalier with the Nazi comparisons.
    Educators in my state are mandatory reporters, so it’s not just a Canadian thing.

  3. #1833
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Toronto, ON, CA
    Posts
    733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Dillon, you don't actually think the postal workers are being told to report ONLY domestic abuse, do you?
    Not necessarily! It's entirely possible, perhaps probable, that they're also being told to report lockdown "violations." Like I said, I don't know about enough about the lockdown situation or political climate there to comment specifically, nor do I care enough to look it up. To me, that's a separate issue. If they're turning the postal service and their local UPS equivalent into a secret police force to enforce the lockdown, that's not cool. The posted article doesn't say anything about that though. You may think it's a reasonable assumption to make, but based off that article alone, it's still just an assumption. If while they're scouring the streets for lockdown violations (bad), they also keep their eyes peeled for signs of domestic violence (good), I consider those to be separate issues.

    All I was pointing out was that to make the leap from that article to the Gestapo is one hell of a leap to make, and one that might only be made "in these trying times." It's an overreaction in the opposite direction. If a UPS driver last July dropped off a package to a crying woman with a black eye, and could hear some asshole in the background cussing her out, I'd hope they'd do something about it. I doubt any of us would bat an eye about that. It certainly wouldn't make all but the most local of news. In this case, due to less social interaction and therefore opportunity for anyone to notice anything, they're giving the few people who may have contact with domestic violence victims some guidance and resources for dealing with it. If they're directing them to report more than that, it's a separate issue to me.

    The idea that "it's none of my business" is a big part how so much domestic violence goes unreported. Hell, the article even mentioned how they were previously pushing awareness of the app in hair salons because it's somewhere women might feel comfortable dishing about what's going on. I'm generally in favour of people being more aware of the issue of domestic violence, and more willing to make it their business. You wouldn't stay quiet if you saw your next door neighbour's house being robbed, but people turn a blind eye to domestic violence all the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by George Christiansen View Post
    I'm all for genuinely caring and nosey neighbors, without the power of the state behind them, keeping people in check through shame and even a good ass kicking in cases like this.

    But how in the hell does a delivery person, who is supposed to stay 6' from the homeowner supposed to even catch this going on?
    As I alluded to above, the article mentions examples like a crying woman answering the door while someone screams at them in the background. I embellished with the black eye. Pretty sure you can notice that if you knock on a door and then stand 6' away.

  4. #1834
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    There is a major red flag in this paper. In short, their high estimate for infection prevalence may be due to poor estimates of the sensitivity of the antibody test kit. The uncertainty about its sensitivity may not be correctly propagated to their final confidence intervals.

    The antibody test kit seems quite specific, but may be terribly unspecific:

    The massive discrepancy between the two test sets should give anyone pause. (I applaud the authors for performing this confirmation to begin with.) They say the uncertainty about sensitivity is propagated, via the delta method, to the final confidence interval for IFR. However, the delta method is an asymptotic approximation. The sample size for Santa Clara prevalence is large (3000+), but the sample size to assess test kit performance is very small (<50), so you would not expect the normal approximation to kick in for the sensitivity estimates.

    If I were a reviewer on this paper, I would ask them to numerically verify (using simple simulations) the final estimates they derived using asymptotic approximations. It is obvious the estimate of infection prevalence would be inflated substantially if we (incorrectly) expect a lot of false negatives.
    I retract this criticism. I did the numerical verification and the application of the delta method seems fine. (Because the test is very specific, the denominators in the first-order approximation don’t go to zero, despite potentially bad sensitivity.)

    However, while reviewing their statistical appendix, I noticed that their expressions for the variance of sensitivity and specificity apparently do not depend on on the sample size. So, if they had 100x larger samples to estimate sensitivity and specificity, their final confidence intervals wouldn’t change. This is either an error or poor notation.

    I inquired. (I am particularly interested in this paper because it is a decent piece of scholarship with major policy implications, unlike the other stuff linked on this thread.)

  5. #1835
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Yucaipa
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dillon Spencer View Post
    I understand that you start by saying you're not opposed to the idea in principle, but then go on to compare an effort to help victims of domestic abuse to the Gestapo... You don't want to be misconstrued, but how exactly is that supposed to be construed? There's quite a gulf between those two stances.

    Domestic violence is notoriously hard to catch, as it happens in the home and is underreported by victims. Earlier posters have pointed to reports of domestic violence being on the rise in various parts of the US since the lockdown. Why would we expect it to be different there? I don't know the exact lockdown situation in the Czech Republic right now, but from the sounds of the article the only people that may be in a position to spot the signs (besides family members) are postal workers and delivery people. For the most part it just sounds like they're receiving training on how to spot the signs, and direction to keep their eyes peeled. They're not kicking down doors and performing warrantless searches. If they think they spot something in the course of doing their regular job, they're receiving guidance on whether to refer someone to an app with resources, or if the situation warrants reporting to the police.
    It's possible that you read something that I didn't catch but the article makes ZERO reference to any sort of actual training happening. This is exactly my issue with the whole program to begin with and why the Gestapo analogy is apt. Last thing anybody needs right now is an illiterate farmer (shout out to Bloomberg) with a sack of letters reporting Joe Upstanding Citizen to the police because his wife answered the door crying... Maybe she was chopping onions, maybe her grandmother just died of COVID, maybe she's binge watching soaps--you get the idea.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dillon Spencer View Post
    I mean, I'm a teacher. I've received training on how to spot signs of abuse, and am required by law to report it if I suspect anything or a student says something. I've never had to, but I have colleagues that have. It's something we take incredibly seriously, and certainly don't do on a whim. The legal requirement to report exists in my province, and I'm pretty sure the rest of them are the same. There's damn near a million of us in the country. Doctors, I know, have the same requirement. That's a whole lot of snitches just waiting to turn in their neighbours, but despite how I'm sure many of you feel about Canadia, we thus far remain concentration camp free.
    I'm a college professor by day. We have the same reporting requirements in the US. I piss on those requirements because I have a PhD in Geography (also happens to be a requirement of my employment, fwiw), which means I'll be the first person to tell you that I'm not qualified to identify, at first blush no less, the signs of any kind of abuse at all, ever, in any situation, period, full stop, end of story. I would, morally speaking, feel MUCH worse if I reported a student with bruises--a boxer, perhaps--who had an otherwise adoring family to CPS than if I FAILED to report a bruised kid who had a shitty stepdad.

    Why, you ask, my Northern brother? Because I've been wrongly accused of serious crimes before and that shit never stops haunting you. It cost me my employment, potential future employment, all of my dozen or so firearms (nevermind the 2nd amendment implications, this is many thousands of dollars of an investment that never loses its value), and several tens of thousand of dollars in legal fees, to scratch the surface. I wouldn't wish the justice system, here nor there, on my worst enemy and that's not an exaggeration.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dillon Spencer View Post
    To be clear, I'm sure you don't believe domestic abusers should be protected. I'm just pushing back because I feel like a lot of people are looking for tyranny around every corner these days. I fully support being vigilant about government overreach, but I think your outrage and disappointment is better spent elsewhere. I don't know about various professional requirements to report abuse in the US, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are already millions of people that are legally required to watch for abuse and report it. You (and others) probably just haven't thought about it until now because you haven't had reason to.
    I truly do appreciate your careful reading and understanding of my initial post and I thank you for clarifying this important distinction. I also appreciate your eagerness for a healthy debate. Americans are indeed hypervigilant against tyranny. It is one of our redeeming characteristics. I will concede, however, that Canadians are far superior at respectfully disagreeing and that's an admirable quality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dillon Spencer View Post
    To me, Cody Annino getting snitched on for going in to clean and maintain his own gym has far more of a Gestapo-esque stench to it than this. I know we've already proven Godwin's law a few times here (although less than I'd have expected in 182 pages. Great job team!), but let's not get too cavalier with the Nazi comparisons.
    My mother was born in a DP camp in Wolfratzhausen, Germany in 1947 so I also appreciate your keenness for not sloppily issuing crass analogies and, under different circumstances, I would probably even agree with you. BUT, given the current dynamics, where police in the UK are on the verge of hand-searching people's groceries for non-essential items, police in NYC are dragging people off of busses for not wearing masks, and police in California are writing $1000 tickets for not wearing masks IN YOUR CAR (yes, really--a student of mine was pulled over last week and given a warning in Riverside county), I'm gonna stick with my Gestapo analogy.

    My people celebrated Passover last week which is a stupid holiday where the Elders of Zion get together to plan the economy and control the weather for the next year AND tell a perfectly retarded story with a perfectly prescient message: get the fuck out of dodge, RIGHT NOW. Don't wait for the god-damned fucking bread to rise--leave right now, if not sooner, or forever suffer the consequences. The timing of this holiday simultaneously with an unprecedented attack on civil liberties (again, I don't issue these platitudes lightly) is proof that the universe favors Jews. Its a crying shame that Jews don't take advantage of this preferential treatment; now is the perfect time to be rioting in the streets against this onslaught of tyranny.

    Quote Originally Posted by George Christiansen View Post
    I'm all for genuinely caring and nosey neighbors, without the power of the state behind them, keeping people in check through shame and even a good ass kicking in cases like this.

    But how in the hell does a delivery person, who is supposed to stay 6' from the homeowner supposed to even catch this going on?
    ^this. You just won yourself a free lifetime membership to SSLA, George.

  6. #1836
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    After Repeated Failures, It’s Time To Permanently Dump Epidemic Models – Issues & Insights

    I have read several of his books, and Fumento has been a consistent voice of reason for decades. I'm very happy to repost his work.
    I don’t disagree with the title of his article, but it seems he’s peddling the same tired misinformation about COVID-19 death coding.

  7. #1837
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Yucaipa
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    I don’t disagree with the title of his article, but it seems he’s peddling the same tired misinformation about COVID-19 death coding.
    Uh, care to clarify this quip? What misinformation? The US is using the same sloppy-ass coding as Italy did, which perfectly explains why we're now suddenly the big 'winners' in terms of body count.

  8. #1838
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    After Repeated Failures, It’s Time To Permanently Dump Epidemic Models – Issues & Insights

    How about we don't just give you this? How about you demonstrating this? How about you explain how an asymptomatic person who is not coughing and slobbering on everybody is "easily" transmitting the disease, with the same apparent ease with which you type this bullshit every fucking day?
    It looks like someone beat me to the answer. I can't believe that was a serious question. Also, you could also read up on the original reference "Typhoid Mary". This is the first time this has ever happened.

  9. #1839
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    I don’t disagree with the title of his article, but it seems he’s peddling the same tired misinformation about COVID-19 death coding.
    Why do you use these editorial words here? From the document he links to: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf

    In cases where a definite diagnosis of COVID–19 cannot
    be made, but it is suspected or likely (e.g., the circumstances
    are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty), it
    is acceptable to report COVID–19 on a death certificate as
    “probable” or “presumed.” In these instances, certifiers should
    use their best clinical judgement in determining if a COVID–19
    infection was likely. However, please note that testing for
    COVID–19 should be conducted whenever possible.
    Are you saying, in the same tired way, that there is no incentive for hospitals to encourage COVID-19 attribution?

  10. #1840
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    2,631

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by BrunoLawerence View Post
    You might want to reread the history of "typhoid Mary". She was an asymptomatic carrier (not sick) who refused to participate in testing, causing many infections/deaths. Given that covid is easily transmissible by asymptomatic individuals, you are advocating for there to be hundreds if not thousands of potential typhoid mary's spread across the country. What happens when the next typhoid mary comes into contact with your family and your family becomes sick?
    What happens when the vast majority (or at least just a simple majority) of people who catch this are in fact asymptomatic "typhoid marys"? Mass incarceration?

Posting Permissions

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