Keep an eye on fitkituk.com. They’ve been emailing me near daily with updates on what equipment they’ve got in. They have been selling some decent 7 ft bars, but alas are sold out now, but they seem to be one of the few U.K. sites that are getting a trickle of decent bars and plates in. Just have to be quick.
Estimation theory is very potent. Applied well, it can dramatically improved signal-to-noise ratio. Obviously that begs the question.
Richard Hamming warned against the misuse of stats in public policy in his book The Art of Probability. Like you say, it’s a long-standing problem.
All-cause mortality data is simple enough to be reported directly, without a pointless regression for estimating baseline deaths.
New guy here. I’m 56 and thankful to be squatting, deadlifting, benching, and pressing in my garage, mask-free, and setting some new house arrest PRs as well. This thread is almost as good as the “joined a new gym last night, hilarious!” thread. Unfortunately, that thread is kind of dead for now, so I’m stuck lurking here, but finally want to contribute.
Rip, I’m along similar ideological lines of your friend John Horgan. Your podcasts with John are two of your best. Make more with him, please! It’s refreshing to listen to an intelligent conversation between two gentlemen who differ on the political spectrum but find much common ground in dealing with the current madness. I, like many out there who are growing weary of this, have discovered a Libertarian gene that has expressed itself recently.
I was initially OK with the shutdown, yes, I bought into it but I now have grown weary of the platitudes and of the “stay home stay safe” crowd. I live in Chicago, which so far has not turned into one giant protein-encased sphere of RNA. But it seems to have in the mind of many. Our governor and mayor have seen fit to produce a five-phase timeline and criteria that are so unreachable any time soon, that many businesses, especially restaurants and bars, will not survive. Phase five is only when we have a vaccine? The end of June before even considering reopening restaurants and bars? Especially when many could have outdoor seating set up during our all-too-brief summers? The IRA (Illinois Restaurant Association, not the Irish Republican Army) was not even consulted before arriving at these benchmarks and dates. Chicago’s lakefront is “closed”. Even Central Park was never closed to my knowledge. Judging from the mayor’s and governor’s facebook page postings lately, more people are pissed than supportive.
I’ve been with my employer for over 25 years and we’ve had to go through a 10% workforce furlough and salary cuts for the rest of us. Never in my time with this company have we had to go to this level of cost reductions. I am worried that I’ll be in the next wave if things don’t improve in the next 90 days.
Anyway, I wonder if the governor and mayor have looked at the Illinois Dept. of Public Health site recently. Lots of numbers Mr. Governor and Madam Mayor, but I don’t see a problem here, does anyone?
Executive Summary (mine): More non-COVID19 patients are on ventilators and taking up ICU beds than COVID19 patients.
COVID-19 Hospital Resource Utilization | IDPH
PUI = Persons Under Investigation
ICU Beds
Total ICU beds: 3,764
ICU beds open: 949 (25%)
ICU beds used: 2,815
COVID + PUI patients in ICU: 1,248
% of total ICU beds occupied by COVID + PUI patients: 33%
% of ICU beds in use occupied by COVID + PUI patients: 44%
Ventilators
Total Vents: 4,590
Vents open: 2,746 (60%)
Vents used: 1,844
Vents used by COVID + PUIs: 730
% of total vents that are used by COVID + PUI patients: 16%
% of vents in use that are used by COVID + PUI patients: 40%
COVID-19 Patients
Total COVID + PUI in Hospitals not in ICU: 3,071
COVID + PUI patients in ICU: 1,248
Total COVID + PUI in Hospital: 4,319
Percent of All Hospital Beds in use that are occupied by COVID+PUI patients: 20%
I already gave the Most Pathetic superlative to the guy who is going to close up shop, take what savings he has, and move out of his home state, leaving behind his friends, family, and a business because he didn't want to put a sticker in his window.
Previously it went to the guy whose freedom was violated by the minimum wage worker that wouldn't hold his receipt for him at Costco.
You make an excellent New Yorker, Hollis.
The problem isn't in the stats. I'm going to be far more generous than a lot of people here and just assume the politicians are asking the wrong question (rather than actively pursuing a power grab). Here is how it happens:
1. Lots of news that coronavirus is bad.
2. Lots of news about what everyone else is doing to stop it.
3. Lots of statistics and science that is not well understood.
4. Well meaning politician asks health advisor "how do I minimise deaths from coronavirus"
5. Health advisor is excited that they are the major advisor on this, and in their enthusiasm takes question literally and advises extreme measures.
(optional step) economic advisor says "but the jobs", health advisor says "this is about lives"
6. Politician acts on health advisor recommendation (taking advice is safe)
7. Unintended consequences ensue.
I don't think that if I were to violate the law, that I'd be putting others at undue risk. It'd probably be a drop in a bucket, if that. Yes, there are impressive nonlinearities in network dynamics, but I still don't think my behaviour alone would have an impact here.
However, If everyone in my position (being separated from loved ones) behaved in the same way, what would be the outcome? That's the critical question here. Because if the answer is that it would put others at undue risk, then it's selfish to make an exception for oneself and expect others not to (and if you expect others to follow suit, and you know that the collective behaviour will put others at undue risk, then you should not initiate that behaviour in the first place). And this would hold true regardless of whether there was a law in place. It's the reason I don't litter (and yes, I know that the inconvenience of finding a garbage can does not even compare to the damage of not being able to hold loved ones).
Right now, my government considers the risk (or claims to consider the risk) great enough that it's a punishable offence to physically interact with a household. If I were to violate this, I'd want to be damn sure that they're wrong. So damn sure, that I could look at everyone involved (the people I live with, my neighbours, my girlfriend's kids, her neighbours, her neighbours kids, all of whom are making sacrifices and yes, even a judge) and say:
"I acted this way because I believe it to be unjust, and here's my evidence and reasoning".
Until that threshold has been met, I am not going to act in a way that, if everyone else acted as such, may put others at undue risk (and to be clear, the "others" here are not myself, my girlfriend, or her kids).
I bike pretty much everywhere and take transit when necessary. If I were to drive, I'd make calculated risks. And whatever decision I chose, I'd be willing to defend that decision to anyone.
If I thought that putting on a mask wouldn't help, yes. Much to the discomfort of those around me in my personal life, I often push back, despite what many here may think. I'm doing it right now, actually.
It's a good question. At least a couple weeks, and no more than a couple months, starting from the time when I believed, with high certitude, that the risk is acceptable. It's hard to predict one's own emotional thresholds of action in advance.
I've made it clear on more than one occasion here that I don't consider governments the ultimate arbiters of morality. And as for the "messaging" to kids, I think it's valuable to model both adherence to the law when it's justified, and its violation when it's unjust (or trivial, as in the case of jay walking).
Maybe he could be transported to the bayous of Louisiana like when the Brits forcibly relocated a bunch of the residents of Canuckistan when they defeated the French army on Plain of Abraham. He might learn to like hot sauce.
Here in Illinois, those unintended consequences are being dismissed as unimportant. Thus, IMO, the recipients of your generosity do not merit it. Which is on them, not you.