COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 207

starting strength gym
Page 207 of 2376 FirstFirst ... 1071571972052062072082092172573077071207 ... LastLast
Results 2,061 to 2,070 of 23756

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #2061
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    1,003

    Default

    • starting strength seminar october 2022
    • starting strength seminar december 2022
    • starting strength seminar february 2023
    Quote Originally Posted by Noah Ebner View Post
    Technically speaking, you are correct; however, I'm being a bit generous and assuming the actual results likely fall somewhere within the median of this interval, resulting in a statistically significant (or at least not non-significant) 'increase' in prevalence. I say 'increase' in air quotes because this is the first empirical study of its kind, so we don't really know if it marks an increase because the only baseline we have to go from comes from modeling, which is the only cancer worse than vanilla statistical analysis--just ask Shiva.
    Your assumption may be correct. In fact, given what other studies have shown about IFR, it would appear that the positives they found in that study may actually not be false positives.

    Neither Shiva nor myself are arguing that the IFR is high. In fact, we both probably agree that the evidence so far points to it being around the 0.5% ballpark, and perhaps quite a bit lower.

    What is at issue here, however, is that the study, by itself, provides virtually no useful information about prevalence or IFR.

    If you had another study that was well designed, which pointed to the same IFR as the poorly designed Santa Clara study, then you could use the second study's finding as a bayesian prior to narrow down the estimate of the false positive rate of the test used in the Santa Clara study.

    But you would not be able to use the Santa Clara study's findings to narrow down the estimate of another study.

    So when assimilating evidence about IFR either way, this study should not really be included in that assimilation.

  2. #2062
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sethiroth95 View Post
    The following youtube videos have all been linked to at least once in this thread.
    YouTube
    YouTube
    YouTube
    YouTube
    YouTube
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WqtBb9lVxo
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK43...ature=youtu.be
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5wn1qs_bBk&t=928s
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHE3...ature=youtu.be
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VK0Wtjh3HVA
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUih...ature=youtu.be
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGUgrEfSgaU
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwPq...ature=youtu.be
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7v2...ature=youtu.be

    Among these videos there are many interviews of doctors and scientists discussing the danger of coronavirus and the current policy decisions that are being made in response. Did you miss these posts?
    I wonder...
    Is it futile for me to re-share these with you? Will you refute all of them? Will you insist that each and every individual in these videos is unqualified to comment? Surely some of these videos present reasonable ideas that are worth considering. No?


    These two articles are the ones that you are referring to.
    https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...e_is_born.html
    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...w_doritos.html
    Please notice that these articles have different authors.
    Trying to discredit the ideas of the "police state" article based upon the fact that it simply co-exists on the same website as the crazy "rainbow doritos make your kids gay" article is irrational. Perhaps you should discredit the "police state" article based upon its own merit (or lack of merit). And not based off of a different author's unrelated ramblings that just so happens to occupy another page on the same website.
    By the way, its totally fine if you don't agree with the conclusions in the "police state" article. I just reject how you came about to deciding that it was not credible or worth discussing.



    I suspected that you weren't trying to support your position with that clip. I decided to post anyway because I knew what you were getting at.
    It is your opinion that those taking stances/viewpoints opposed to yours are trying to support their viewpoints with unsatisfactory sources. I wouldn't deny that this has happened a time or two or three in this thread.
    However, I contend that there have been many sources shared in this thread that are satisfactory and worth some consideration that happen to disagree with your opinion. You seem to have missed or ignored these sources.


    Agreed. I am happy to watch the discussion about the statistical merit from the sidelines.

    Thanks.
    I am happy that you found the time to go through the entire thread to find all the videos that have been posted. Now, please go back through them and locate the one's that I had specifically mentioned/referenced. There are over 200 pages in this thread, each containing several conversations at the same time. I am not going back through them all, nor have I participated in every discussion going on. If the point of all that work was to show me that I did not read every post or comment on every discussion inside of the thread I guess all that work was well worth it. I could have saved you some time though and would have simply agreed to this assertion. Well done. Here is the specific video I was referencing that you included in your list.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHE3...ature=youtu.be

    Certainly, given the man's credentials, I would respect his opinion on law or medieval history. However, the current pandemic is not his field of study and anything stated is simply his non-expert opinion. My entire point was that the clip I presented from a late night talk show hosts holds just as much merit in the conversation as that man's opinion. Certainly the clip from the late night talk show host also presented some reasonable ideas worth considering as well, but it was equally dismissed by you as well. Looks like you are guilty of the same thing you are accusing me of and that was the point entirely. The difference is that I was doing it intentionally and what I thought was blatantly obvious. My argument was that people should base their opinions on facts and not opinions of random internet bloggers who happen to share their opinion.

    Also, the actual source where you find information does in fact matter. This is in regards to the articles posted from "american thinker" you also found the time to post above. That website is nothing more than a right wing propaganda site that supplies daily doses of the crazy. My reference to the "rainbow Doritos" article was to show the quality of the material that is posted there. The article posted by Mark was simply all sorts of crazy on its own merits, even if it had a separate author. The quality of the information is on par with the other crazy ramblings that typically get posted on that site. I would be more than happy to engage in that conversation if you like.

    Quote Originally Posted by ltomo View Post
    Don't bother engaging him. Bruno is just trolling the discussion. He's allegedly an LVN, but my suspicion is that he's a college kid whose first language isn't English.
    I'm an LVN? Interesting.

  3. #2063
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Rocksprings, TX
    Posts
    290

    Default

    Here's the real problem....Americans are stupid:

    AP-NORC poll: Few Americans support easing virus protections

    At least according to the poll.

    sb

  4. #2064
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    243

  5. #2065
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    2,858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Berry View Post
    Here's the real problem....Americans are stupid:

    AP-NORC poll: Few Americans support easing virus protections

    At least according to the poll.

    sb
    I don’t know about this poll, but there are people that are very happy with the current arrangement.

    Consider people who had horrible 1hr+ commutes? Live in NJ and commute into NYC, for example. As long as they are still getting paid, they are in no rush to get back. Their disposable income just went up. A lot of these people also just got $1200 for no reason and the promise for more.

    I suppose they will complain the loudest when their property values tank, when their elite school districts are indistinguishable from the worst, or their employers figure out that non-essential is not a figure of speech.

  6. #2066
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Berry View Post
    Here's the real problem....Americans are stupid:

    AP-NORC poll: Few Americans support easing virus protections

    At least according to the poll.

    sb
    I've stopped trusting polls. The failed predictions about Trump's election were the straw that broke the camel's back. There's no way they can conduct a comprehensive, nationwide (or even statewide) accurate poll about something like this in a matter of days. The media's only real interest is selling advertisements to eyeballs, so it's in their best interest if they can keep the panic levels high and eyeballs focused on them.

    Out of the 70 people I regularly stay in touch with, maybe two think the stay at home order is a good idea. Everyone else is worried about losses and the price of oil.

    And Bruno, what do you do for a living?

  7. #2067
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    493

    Default

    ACE2 receptors are highly expressed in the testes, and male sex hormones are implicated in the severity of the disease. Concerned individuals might consider castration, out of an abundance of caution.

  8. #2068
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spacediver View Post
    Your assumption may be correct. In fact, given what other studies have shown about IFR, it would appear that the positives they found in that study may actually not be false positives.

    Neither Shiva nor myself are arguing that the IFR is high. In fact, we both probably agree that the evidence so far points to it being around the 0.5% ballpark, and perhaps quite a bit lower.

    What is at issue here, however, is that the study, by itself, provides virtually no useful information about prevalence or IFR.

    If you had another study that was well designed, which pointed to the same IFR as the poorly designed Santa Clara study, then you could use the second study's finding as a bayesian prior to narrow down the estimate of the false positive rate of the test used in the Santa Clara study.

    But you would not be able to use the Santa Clara study's findings to narrow down the estimate of another study.

    So when assimilating evidence about IFR either way, this study should not really be included in that assimilation.
    I just want to chime in here with my repetitive caveat that the IFR of COVID, which we will at some point figure out, should not be compared directly to the CFR of seasonal flu (which is generally estimated around 0.1%).

    If anyone can find an IFR of the regular old seasonal influenza (in a population study where they tested asymptomatic people who never thought they had the flu), please post the citation here. It will be very helpful.

    Because if the CFR of flu is 0.1% it is extremely likely that the IFR is significantly lower. How many people do you know who get a flu test without any symptoms?

    So when I see on the news that COVID IFR is .5%, therefore it is 5x as deadly as flu, I cringe, because many of us expect the IFR to fall to 1% or a little below. And I anticipate people carrying on with "SEE? It IS just like a regular flu" when they see COVID IFR=flu CFR. In my opinion, unencumbered by actual data, the IFR for the regular old flu may actually be 0.01%.

    Do not mistake me for saying that all the economy-wrecking precautions are worth it. I don't feel qualified to opine on that. I'm just trying to inject a little bit of rationality into the debate where I think I can.

    And my experience in the hospital has been that most people who get covid don't get sick, but when they do, they get really fucking sick. And it's worse of course for people with comorbidities, but it is not rational to say that those deaths were not all covid-related, because they were sick people who were going to die soon anyway. A 40-year old guy with type 2 diabetes who is working more than full time has a greater than 1 year life expectancy, any way you slice it. But if he gets sick with covid, he's at significant risk for getting vented and dying.

    My 87-year-old father-in-law has long referred to pneumonia as "the old man's friend" because it comes and peacefully (well, sometimes it's peaceful) takes you away. There is a lot of that going on right now, and covid may be the old man's friend in that way, but it's also a bastard to a lot of people who had some significant meaningful and productive time ahead of them. Many of them look like novices we see here who discover SSNLP and turn their lives around. A significant minority of people who die from covid could have done that, but will not get the opportunity due to covid.

    It is possible to think this is a bad disease that can wreak havoc on our individual health and our health care system, and our economy (which is already saddled with excessive healthcare expenditures), and that we should be doing some serious quarantining of people at risk and practice some serious hygiene and physical distancing, and ALSO to think that putting 20+ million people out of work is not an acceptable way to do this. It will be sickening to hear of the loved ones lost to COVID who had plenty more to give and experience. It will also be sickening to hear of the families who were financially set back irreparably. Especially if we hear about Wall Street and boardroom bailouts for people and "corporate citizens" who should have had (and in many cases do have) plenty of means to weather this with the "rainy day fund" that we are all told to set aside. It seems the masters of capitalism and the companies they run are unable to take this basic advice.

    OK, so maybe in addition to injecting some rationality, I got to ranting a little bit. Just remember the IFR=/=CFR bit, and you will be ahead of most of the media in understanding what these numbers mean. Carry on.

  9. #2069
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    49,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    ACE2 receptors are highly expressed in the testes, and male sex hormones are implicated in the severity of the disease. Concerned individuals might consider castration, out of an abundance of caution.
    Most of them have nothing to worry about.

    From Mark Levin:

    To be clear. President Trump hasn't shut down a single business. The Governors did.

    We’re seeing the most draconian measures enforced at all levels of government that we've ever seen in our lifetimes, and yet rather than being alarmed by the things going on, so many of you applaud.

    People are being arrested for spending too much time outside, and you applaud. Pastors are being arrested for daring to hold church services, and you applaud. A child's birthday party is raided by police, and you applaud. A young woman is ticketed for going on a leisurely drive alone because it's deemed "non-essential travel", and you applaud. A parade of school teachers and administrators who wanted to drive through neighborhoods and wave at children is busted up by cops because they were "non-essential," and you applaud. A lone paddleboarder in the ocean on a beach without any other people around is arrested because he's violating quarantine orders, and you applaud.

    People are being denied life saving medical treatments because they're not a priority right now (not "essential" as deemed by the government) as the entirety of our medical system is focused on one thing, and you applaud.

    Businesses are being forcibly closed and padlocked and owners arrested for refusing to shut down, and you applaud. Dairy farmers (and soon, other farmers) are being incentivized to stop dairy farming and to sell their herds, and you don't seem to understand the implications.

    You're being told to use hotlines and online forms provided by your local governments to report your neighbors who don't obey, and you comply. You scold people day after day for not obeying government edicts, and if any of us dare to question what's happening, you lecture about how we're a danger to society and and we just don't care about people dying.

    You've somehow managed to convince yourselves that the people whose lives are affected by a virus are MUCH more important than the people whose lives are being destroyed (and in many cases, leading to death) by the effects of a worldwide economic shutdown and impending worldwide depression the likes of which no one has ever seen before.

    At what point will you start QUESTIONING what's going on? How far does the government have to push before you're jolted awake from your slumber? How far are you willing to go with this?

    If they told you to load your families onto train cars so that you could be taken to Virus Protection Facilities for your own safety, would you do it?

    YES. Yes, you would. That much has become painfully obvious to me. And the whole time, you'd be shaking your finger and yelling at those of us who refused, accusing us of being "a danger to society" and "not caring if people die."

    But they don't have to load you onto train cars and take you to Virus Protection Facilities, or force you to comply, because you do that voluntarily. They control your mind. They control you through fear. They control you by convincing you that the world is a scary dangerous place, but they're here to protect you, care for you, and keep you safe, just as long as you OBEY.

    They know that as long as you're locked inside your comfortable home with Netflix, Hulu, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and a cell phone, while dangling a $1200 check in front of you like a carrot on a stick, you'll comply. No force is necessary for the majority of the herd.

    YOU ARE IMPRISONED, willingly, and you're too blind to see it.

  10. #2070
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    419

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Thank God for those protesters...I don't necessarily agree with them...oh, hell, yes I do...but its nice to know Americans aren't all sheep

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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