starting strength gym
Page 157 of 3004 FirstFirst ... 571071471551561571581591672072576571157 ... LastLast
Results 1,561 to 1,570 of 30035

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #1561
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Lakeland, FL
    Posts
    3,112

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    Quote Originally Posted by wiigelec View Post
    How do you know what an unchecked outbreak would look like in order to make the comparison?
    It's like all the Scientism going around: shit guesses based on even shittier data.

    We know for a fact that there were patients being checked into the Wuhan hospital ICU's for the Kung Flu in mid November. There's no reason whatsoever to assume that these are the first actual cases rather the first documented cases. So for at least the first 4 months it was flying all over the world and pretty much nobody was doing jack about it. We didn't have any documented deaths of it in the US until the end of February when we had less than 10.

    The time frames for the plateaus don't work out for people who want to give credit to antisocial distancing and Shudder In Place orders and without the panic driving people to hospitals and New York likely being about as accurate with their numbers as Italy was, I seriously doubt the public would have noticed how many people died from it. it would have been like a bad flu year...maybe.

  2. #1562
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    East Haddam, Connecticut
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    He's jerking it out of his New York City ass.
    It's almost as if Lazy and the people who made up the "doomsday" models telling us millions were going to die, have absolutely no fucking idea what they are talking about! Or what about Byrx and Fauci, who said 100-240k deaths were "best-case scenario" with perfect mitigation and social distancing... now they have the audacity to tell us that it's all the social distancing that's bringing the projections down to less than 60k. You DON'T get to have it both ways!

    In the meantime, we are literally living in Orwell's 1984... but hey, at least, "we are all in this together."

  3. #1563
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    2,631

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Like "The Intelligence Community" and their WMDs during Iraq -- only they still inhabit DC in perfect health, somehow.
    They exist more or less as a weird blend of a fourth branch of the federal government, an organized crime organization, and a cult. They basically try to spook every incoming president into going along with whatever they want, and I think the current one is probably the first in a while to wave them off.

  4. #1564
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FlamingoDeFranc View Post
    The stages of my mental journey from when San Francisco was first put on lockdown—Pissed, perplexed
    And then the lockdown for most us—Pissed, perplexed, afraid, curious, perplexed, pissed, educated, perplexed, pissed, depressed…..Starting Strength bar is due to be delivered on Monday and then I can resume training. I put the invite out to a few people in the local area who were serious, none were interested. I supposed they’re right, training is not worth certain death.
    The emotional stages of strength training deprivation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Charles View Post
    I have no idea who has access to tower records.
    Hacker Spoofs Cell Phone Tower to Intercept Calls | WIRED
    Stingray phone tracker - Wikipedia

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Dragisic View Post
    The first seal has already been broken, the second will be in say, six months to a year.

    Did you know that there is a theory among Bible scholars that the Book of Revelation is a cypher for the fall of the Roman Empire? My name translates to John, and I can tell you from personal experience that sufficient quantities of hallucinogenic drugs have a weird way of melting the past and future together via metaphors through which one perceives the world. In my case, the rift was some 20 years, I can only imagine how much my apostle namesake must have taken. Dalio is probably on some heavy shit too, probably DMT, but he's seeing it through the Buddhist and Hindu system of repeating cycles, they got to him via the transcendental meditation madness. Good writer though.

    Fuck dude, Librem? Richard Stallman approved? If ever there was a commie...
    Btw, the Starting Strength crowd really reminds me of Arch Linux users.
    I do plan on reading more of his writings as well as a couple of the others you have alluded to. I did understand the argument and agree with what you just posted about it; I had, instead, keyed in on a few areas of his argument and expounded upon its implications.

    The cypher theory is not something I knew about. I will look into it further. I have not personally done hallucinogenic drugs, but I of course have talked to many people who have. This is an interesting concept and is important to consider in several contexts.

    A good idea or product could come from a turtle, for all I care. If it's a useful improvement, it needs to be adopted. I do not believe it is my responsibility to decide what other people can believe. I don't have a problem with commies unless or until they try to impose their beliefs on me.

    I won't deny that I have played around with Arch Linux a bit.


    Quote Originally Posted by VNV View Post
    Cool, but the enthusiasm over details of the Intel Management Engine by geeks spooks me.
    Me too.

    Quote Originally Posted by ltomo View Post
    I'm going to piggy back your and Jovan's line of dialogue and put a plug in for thelasypsychiatrist.com. He hasn't updated his blog in years, but if you read through some of his later posts (e.g. Hipsters on Foodstamps) he's got some very interesting analyses of how modern society operates.

    The Last Psychiatrist
    I will check it out

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnsonville View Post
    I am genuinely baffled at the reluctance some people have towards this treatment?
    This is speculation on my part, but I believe the potential antibiotic shortage is coming into play the same way the mask shortage did.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Dragisic View Post
    This is my favorite thing. Bozos all over the world have become leading experts in epidemiology, infectious diseases, medical treatment, you name it. Fuck all of you sheep with your math, physics, chemistry, biology darling, ain’t nobody got time for all the schooling, here I come with my first hand observations, twenty minutes on Wikipedia and critical thinking.
    Have more confidence in yourself. The machine appears magical, until you break it down into its simple components. If you are smart, you can learn the basics quickly. You may be able to become 80% proficient. Those who are 100% proficient are often only 50% correct. In this scenario, your 80% proficiency is enough to get several things right that experts may not. Best to at least attempt intellectual independence.

    Experts often get tunnel-vision, suffer from overconfidence or want to show people how smart/skilled they are by adding unnecessary complexity. These tendencies can cause them to make stupid mistakes that few novices ever would.


    Quote Originally Posted by chrisza View Post
    I was wondering why Trump continued to give Fauci the podium for so long when he's been basically 80-100% wrong about everything. He has missed the dartboard completely and now try's to play dumb and pretend the "models" were someone else's.
    Trump is a political hostage to the fear-response of the public.

  5. #1565
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Murphysboro, IL
    Posts
    726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    Incidentally -- I am no fan at all of the surveillance society we're all in (well before this outbreak). And I think it's fucking awful what this pandemic is doing to the economy -- by which I mean small business and workers. As I've already said, I think the state (which is all of us) should step in and do whatever is necessary to help the people and businesses that are most affected. And I agree that the way this is actually happening -- *especially* in the US -- is a complete shit show. But as I also keep saying, unless you actually have a viable alternative, bitching about the public health interventions is a bit pointless. And *wishing* that this thing is just a bad flu is NOT a viable alternative. Which is why I keep coming back to the numbers and facts.
    An convincing shedding of crocodile tears. If you cared that bad about what you profess above, you wouldn't steadfastly remain blinded by the smoke and dark (as opposed to the light) of the numbers you speak of. Which appear to be your real interest. The rest of it seems all a mere abstraction to you.

  6. #1566
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Like Tylenol. And aspirin. And every other drug except anabolic steroids.
    Correct. Someone asked why people were hesitant, so I was answering their question.

  7. #1567
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    172

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    I explicitly linked to the CDC data in my original post on this, where I used the 7 most recent years for which complete (non-preliminary) data is available (2010/11 - 2016/17). The number of flu deaths was about the same or lower than the current number of COVID-19 deaths in 2 out of 7 of those seasons (2011/12: 12,000; 2015/16: 23,000). That makes the current COVID-19 numbers "pretty typical" for a flu season in my book -- certainly not atypical. And what the hell? I cited the actual numbers in my original post, so if I was trying to mislead anybody, that would be a pretty stupid way to do it.


    Where are you getting this from? Could you link to the CDC site you are using? The de-facto standard for COVID-19 stats is the JHU collection, available at COVID-19/csse_covid_19_data at master * CSSEGISandData/COVID-19 * GitHub
    I just pulled the latest data from this, in which the maximum number of daily deaths is 2108 occurring on April 10. The Worldometer data set shows a peak in daily deaths on the same date, at 2035 deaths. And, of course, the apparent drop in the two later days is almost certainly due to incomplete reporting in the most recent data. So I don't see any evidence at all that the peak was last week. Do you? If there is something hopeful, it's that the number of new daily *cases* may be plateauing, and those should lead the number of deaths.


    First, Sweden vs Norway shows that interventions do something. You quoted the Swedish daily deaths -- the highest number there (114) is only slightly lower than the *total* number of deaths in Norway so far (134). (Incidentally, I'd be extremely wary of trusting any data from the last 3 days or so, just because they always get updated.) Second, everybody keeps saying "the models were wrong" -- but that just shows that nobody bothers actually reading the papers. I did. The Imperial College paper from which the 2.2M estimate for an unchecked outbreak came from, also *explicitly* presented a wide variety of scenarios *with interventions*. And the numbers for those scenarios are pretty well aligned with those we're seeing. You can easily check this for yourself. Third, the IFR estimate spacediver cited from German data (0.4%) is in line with other estimates. In particular, random testing in Iceland shows that about 0.3% to 0.8% of their population are infected, i.e. between about 1000 and 3000 people. They have had 8 deaths so far in Iceland, suggesting an IFR between 0.3% and 0.8%. Small numbers, but consistent. Given a reasonably well established IFR, and the fact that herd immunity happens at ~70% infected, what logic would lets you assume you would NOT have a large number of deaths?

    Just as a thought experiment, suppose that some hypothetical disease was really as bad or worse than people like me say COVID-19 is. Epidemiologists tell you that you can dramatically reduce the number of deaths by doing something unpopular. Are you saying you should *never* do because you couldn't ever prove that it was your unpopular action that reduced the number of deaths? I'm a huge fan of randomized controlled trials, but this doesn't seem a good time or place for one.
    In which State do you live Lazygun?

  8. #1568
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    1,003

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    About 60 million people in the US had H1N1 in 2009-2010. But it doesn't matter now. Manufacturing has slowed 75%, crops are rotting in the fields, unemployment is spreading faster than the disease ever had the potential to spread, so you and lazy just keep typing about how we're all going to die while people who don't live in Toronto and New York City have to wonder what the next 10 years is going to look like without jobs, businesses, food, clothing, shelter, access to sanity, and government restraint, all the while looking forward to the next epidemic and the response to that one.
    for fucks sake Rip, you're the one who keeps asking for an adult conversation.

    I'm trying to establish agreed upon premises here, I'm *not* yet attempting to come to conclusions. That was the whole point of the post where I outlined some potential strategies.

  9. #1569
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    I explicitly linked to the CDC data in my original post on this, where I used the 7 most recent years for which complete (non-preliminary) data is available (2010/11 - 2016/17). The number of flu deaths was about the same or lower than the current number of COVID-19 deaths in 2 out of 7 of those seasons (2011/12: 12,000; 2015/16: 23,000). That makes the current COVID-19 numbers "pretty typical" for a flu season in my book -- certainly not atypical. And what the hell? I cited the actual numbers in my original post, so if I was trying to mislead anybody, that would be a pretty stupid way to do it.
    Ok, so now instead of "you already have as many deaths *right now* as in a fairly standard flu season", it's "you almost already have as many deaths as the second lowest flu season in the last 9 years". Totally the same thing, got it.

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    Where are you getting this from? Could you link to the CDC site you are using?
    The site I'm getting that from is: Cases in U.S. | CDC.

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    So I don't see any evidence at all that the peak was last week. Do you?
    Are you actually responding to me? Did you read my post? What the hell are you talking about? My words were: "So *at best*, we hit the peak a week ago and are trending downwards. I'm not saying that's the case, but that would in fact be *best*."

    We either have a different definition of "peak", or of "best", or of both.

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    First, Sweden vs Norway shows that interventions do something. You quoted the Swedish daily deaths -- the highest number there (114) is only slightly lower than the *total* number of deaths in Norway so far (134). (Incidentally, I'd be extremely wary of trusting any data from the last 3 days or so, just because they always get updated.)
    Well, you ignored my point again, but I'm getting used to that. We'll see how much the numbers get revised upwards in a few days. Seems unlikely that they've undercounted by an entire order of magnitude, but time will tell.

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    Second, everybody keeps saying "the models were wrong" -- but that just shows that nobody bothers actually reading the papers. I did. The Imperial College paper from which the 2.2M estimate for an unchecked outbreak came from, also *explicitly* presented a wide variety of scenarios *with interventions*. And the numbers for those scenarios are pretty well aligned with those we're seeing. You can easily check this for yourself.
    Did you actually read my post? Which part of what I actually typed is this gibberish even a response to?

    Also, I'm calling bullshit on your knowledge of the Imperial College paper. There's no way you can say "the numbers for those scenarios are pretty well aligned with those we're seeing". Their scenarios do not contain enough granularity to compare the numbers we're seeing.

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    Third, the IFR estimate spacediver cited from German data (0.4%) is in line with other estimates. In particular, random testing in Iceland shows that about 0.3% to 0.8% of their population are infected, i.e. between about 1000 and 3000 people. They have had 8 deaths so far in Iceland, suggesting an IFR between 0.3% and 0.8%. Small numbers, but consistent. Given a reasonably well established IFR, and the fact that herd immunity happens at ~70% infected, what logic would lets you assume you would NOT have a large number of deaths?
    Making assumptions without data is your schtick, not mine.

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    Just as a thought experiment, suppose that some hypothetical disease was really as bad or worse than people like me say COVID-19 is. Epidemiologists tell you that you can dramatically reduce the number of deaths by doing something unpopular. Are you saying you should *never* do because you couldn't ever prove that it was your unpopular action that reduced the number of deaths? I'm a huge fan of randomized controlled trials, but this doesn't seem a good time or place for one.
    How about you answer one of the thought experiment questions I've asked you over the last several days before I answer one of yours, ok?

  10. #1570
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    729

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Like Tylenol. And aspirin. And every other drug except anabolic steroids.
    actually ...

    they killed quite a few (million) people by overdosing aspirin in 1917-18 for the flu.

    may want to pump the breaks on the current wonder drug talk.

    Salicylates and Pandemic Influenza Mortality, 1918–1919 Pharmacology, Pathology, and Historic Evidence | Clinical Infectious Diseases | Oxford Academic

Posting Permissions

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