Bad News Thread

dad4 said:
I've been looking at the upper midwest to try to guess where confirmed infections tops out.

Seems to be just over 10% if you insist on being macho. (North Dakota plan.)

Means we don't hit pure herd immunity until we are at 34 million confirmed infections. About 100 days at 200k per day.

Mind you, that plan is bat shit crazy stupid. You'd have something like 2 million extra hospitalizations and 200,000 extra deaths.
Click to expand...

I wasn’t suggesting that the above was a plan. More that the ‘bat shit crazy’ numbers, 2mil hospitalizations and 200k deaths may already be in the cards.

Vaccine availability may play a small part in achieving herd immunity given the rate of spread. If widespread distribution is expected in April/May... we’re going to be well past that 100 day mark.

True the run rate is extremely unlikely to remain constant, but with that time frame still being in respiratory illness season and a possible 3rd wave in store (each wave has increased, likely based on the baseline of possible carriers at onset) the net results may not be that dissimilar, before widespread availability of a vaccine.
 
dad4 said:
So we are back to psychiatric evaluations of those who disagree with you?

Don't forget to paste your words into a meme generator. That will really prove your point.

We both know that forecasts are difficult. Criticizing forecasts without making them is dirty pool. So don't do it.
Click to expand...

The extent to which you are delusional is you are actually arguing you rather have government policy based on a forecast that's wrong than one than none at all. If you follow it logically the first is guaranteed to get you wrong results...in the 2nd you might actually get lucky (assuming there wasn't anything other than models to go on, i.e., no other evidence). Only a math teacher could be this myopic.
 
N00B said:
True the run rate is extremely unlikely to remain constant, but with that time frame still being in respiratory illness season and a possible 3rd wave in store (each wave has increased, likely based on the baseline of possible carriers at onset) the net results may not be that dissimilar, before widespread availability of a vaccine.
Click to expand...

If it follows the pattern of prior respiratory epidemics (which we have no proof to believe it will), the second wave is generally the worst.
 
dad4 said:
The Danish mask study correctly demonstrated that surgical masks on the receiving end reduce risk to the wearer by less than 50%.

Then, some fools on the internet misinterpreted the study to claim that masks do not work overall.

Do we need to go back to the study to remember what it does, and does not, say? Or can we agree to stop misrepresenting the study?
Click to expand...
www.medpagetoday.com

Opinion | Here's How to Think About the Danish Mask Study

What the DANMASK-19 trial showed and didn't show about mask use and COVID-19
www.medpagetoday.com www.medpagetoday.com

I'll pull a page from your book and say I'll take the interpretation of an MD over a math teacher. :rolleyes:
 
Grace T. said:
If it follows the pattern of prior respiratory epidemics (which we have no proof to believe it will), the second wave is generally the worst.
Click to expand...

Here is a lucid discussion of "waves" --

www.reuters.com

Explainer: What is a second wave of a pandemic, and has it arrived in the U.S.?

Infectious disease experts, economists and politicians have raised concerns about a second wave of coronavirus infections in the United States that could worsen in the coming months.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com

"Dr. Eric Toner, a senior scientist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, said he does not find “waves” to be an especially useful term in describing a pandemic."

The article was published in June, and predicts an increase in cases starting in October, so they got that about right.
 
Grace T. said:
www.medpagetoday.com

Opinion | Here's How to Think About the Danish Mask Study

What the DANMASK-19 trial showed and didn't show about mask use and COVID-19
www.medpagetoday.com www.medpagetoday.com

I'll pull a page from your book and say I'll take the interpretation of an MD over a math teacher. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You might want to actually read the article.

"Was the trial underpowered? The trial was powered to test its hypothesis of a 50% reduction in SARS-CoV-2 from mask wearing in a setting where the baseline risk was approximately 2%."

How, exactly, is that different from my claim that the study shows that any reduction in risk to the wearer is less than 50%?
 
Grace T. said:
The extent to which you are delusional is you are actually arguing you rather have government policy based on a forecast that's wrong than one than none at all. If you follow it logically the first is guaranteed to get you wrong results...in the 2nd you might actually get lucky (assuming there wasn't anything other than models to go on, i.e., no other evidence). Only a math teacher could be this myopic.
Click to expand...
Yet another ad hominem attack?

I must have made a good point.
 
This is the most hilarious stay at home order that's just been issued for the city of Los Angeles. It prohibits, under penalty of misdeamenor, leaving your house or traveling by foot, bike, public transport, car or scooter. It then exempts the homeless. It then exempts a long line of business activities. Such business activities include hard ware stores, piercing shops, tanning shops, dog groomers, tattoo parlors, bike repair shops, taxis, and retail shops (at reduced capapcity) It exempts outdoor worship (which is now clearly unconstitutional since this is the very scenario addressed in the SCOTUS case...they could have done a percentage cap but chose to ignore it). It pretty much keeps the outdoor recreation sites open with a handful of tweaks here and there (sorry water poloers). Of course film and TV production remain open. Zoos are o.k. Pro sports and day camps still allowed. It would be funny if it weren't so sad. Basically it's a plea to do the one thing they can't control: private socialization....and it takes them pages to do it. History might very well record this as one of the most ludicrous documents to emerge from the pandemic. Make sure to tell your kids they can't go outside scooting in the city of LA...they might get charged with a misdemeanor.


 
dad4 said:
You might want to actually read the article.

"Was the trial underpowered? The trial was powered to test its hypothesis of a 50% reduction in SARS-CoV-2 from mask wearing in a setting where the baseline risk was approximately 2%."

How, exactly, is that different from my claim that the study shows that any reduction in risk to the wearer is less than 50%?
Click to expand...

When this is all over I'm happy to get together, have a beer and give you a reading comprehension tutorial. But frankly there's no point in explaining someone else's work because if you don't get their work (an MD expert which you always ask for) much less you'll accept anything you say. IHe even addresses your point verbatim but I'm too tired and don't care enough to annotate. 'll give you one thing you are free to take as a compliment or attack depending on how stable of a personality you are: dealing with you is easily more frustrating than dealing with EOTL, Espola, messi, or any of the other fringers of the left or right.

p.s. it's cute you engage in ad hominems and then complain about ad hominems. no one is fooled by it.

p.p.s. my pet theory is that you went into math because of your deficiencies in the verbal arts...it was more comfortable.
 
Grace T. said:
This is the most hilarious stay at home order that's just been issued for the city of Los Angeles. It prohibits, under penalty of misdeamenor, leaving your house or traveling by foot, bike, public transport, car or scooter. It then exempts the homeless. It then exempts a long line of business activities. Such business activities include hard ware stores, piercing shops, tanning shops, dog groomers, tattoo parlors, bike repair shops, taxis, and retail shops (at reduced capapcity) It exempts outdoor worship (which is now clearly unconstitutional since this is the very scenario addressed in the SCOTUS case...they could have done a percentage cap but chose to ignore it). It pretty much keeps the outdoor recreation sites open with a handful of tweaks here and there (sorry water poloers). Of course film and TV production remain open. Zoos are o.k. Pro sports and day camps still allowed. It would be funny if it weren't so sad. Basically it's a plea to do the one thing they can't control: private socialization....and it takes them pages to do it. History might very well record this as one of the most ludicrous documents to emerge from the pandemic. Make sure to tell your kids they can't go outside scooting in the city of LA...they might get charged with a misdemeanor.


Click to expand...

The most idiotic thing about this is remember they told us if places adopted mask ordinances such lockdowns wouldn't be necessary. They even said masks were better than vaccines. The city of LA has had mask mandate 7 months going on 8.
 
Grace T. said:
When this is all over I'm happy to get together, have a beer and give you a reading comprehension tutorial. But frankly there's no point in explaining someone else's work because if you don't get their work (an MD expert which you always ask for) much less you'll accept anything you say. IHe even addresses your point verbatim but I'm too tired and don't care enough to annotate. 'll give you one thing you are free to take as a compliment or attack depending on how stable of a personality you are: dealing with you is easily more frustrating than dealing with EOTL, Espola, messi, or any of the other fringers of the left or right.

p.s. it's cute you engage in ad hominems and then complain about ad hominems. no one is fooled by it.

p.p.s. my pet theory is that you went into math because of your deficiencies in the verbal arts...it was more comfortable.
Click to expand...
1- I don't ask for MDs. I ask for epidemiologists. As before, the two are not the same.

2- your source agrees with me on what the study says. It establishes an upper bound on benefit to the wearer. That upper bound is 50%.

If you want to cite a source to prove me wrong, you might want to pick an article which disagrees with me.
 
dad4 said:
1- I don't ask for MDs. I ask for epidemiologists. As before, the two are not the same.

2- your source agrees with me on what the study says. It establishes an upper bound on benefit to the wearer. That upper bound is 50%.

If you want to cite a source to prove me wrong, you might want to pick an article which disagrees with me.
Click to expand...

it doesn’t go as far as you say it does. It takes a very good middle ground. When this is over happy to work on your reading comp issues face to face but not gonna fix them here over soccer forum. Don’t care about snapping you out of it enough.
 
Grace T. said:
it doesn’t go as far as you say it does. It takes a very good middle ground. When this is over happy to work on your reading comp issues face to face but not gonna fix them here over soccer forum. Don’t care about snapping you out of it enough.
Click to expand...
One more personal attack.

Zero quotes to prove your point.

Yawn.
 
dad4 said:
Which projections do you like better?

Or would you prefer that we made policy without the use of projections?
Click to expand...
Ok, I'll do something a little easier than beds that makes the same point. Experts: Joe Biden (JB) and CDC Director Robert Redfield (R)

www.forbes.com

Biden Predicts 250,000 More Coronavirus Deaths, Urges Americans To Stay Home Over Holidays

You cannot be travelling during these holidays, as much as you want to,” the president-elect said.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

“We’re likely to lose another 250,000 people dead between now and January,” Biden said.

On Wednesday, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield projected 200,000 more coronavirus deaths in December.

Wait, what? 250,000 deaths in December? <opens calculator app on phone> That comes to an average of 8,064.5 deaths/day. How? At our peak this summer, we had a 7-day average of 2,232. Redfield comes in at 6451.6 deaths/day. Today was big at 2610. That less than a third of the AVERAGE that Biden predicts and barely 40% of what Redfield predicts. The current 7-day average is 1531. How do we get to those averages? Cases must be growing, big time, right?

1606970489539.png


Well, not exactly.


1606972553249.png

I can get that deaths/day will increase since deaths lag cases and we are in the midst of a steep increase. However, you can see that before the 7-day average case graph crosses 150,000 it is concave down. I'm guessing that little peak in cases just prior to Thanksgiving is the "extra" folks getting tested before they travel. I have a feeling it would be flatter and a better match with the cases after Thanksgiving that are lower as people didn't test Thanksgiving day and likely not as often in the following weekend (just a guess). To me, this looks like the peak is about now. This doesn't indicate to me a 4 to 5 fold increase in deaths is in the offing.

So, I looked at the state trends to see if anything there might indicate a significant near-term rise. The highest states in cases are all trending down. Only NY is growing and (barely) concave up. The west coast, north-east and mid-Atlantic have some states that are increasing a bit. Everything I see indicates a near term drop in cases. I just don't see how we get anywhere near those numbers as a daily average. I guess the "wildcard" is the Thanksgiving effect - which, so far, appears to be no effect at all. Maybe it's coming.

I'd go with a range of 60,000 - 70,000. 2000/day --> 62,000. Nothing I see indicates it should be much more than that. I guess we'll see. Let's hope I'm correct - 200,000, is a huge number.

Deaths in December:
JB: 250,000
R: 200,000
K: 62,000

And, finally, Grace and dad, knock it off or I'll tell the parents. I can't tell you how many times I heard that from my older brothers.
 
Grace T. said:
When this is all over I'm happy to get together, have a beer and give you a reading comprehension tutorial. But frankly there's no point in explaining someone else's work because if you don't get their work (an MD expert which you always ask for) much less you'll accept anything you say. IHe even addresses your point verbatim but I'm too tired and don't care enough to annotate. 'll give you one thing you are free to take as a compliment or attack depending on how stable of a personality you are: dealing with you is easily more frustrating than dealing with EOTL, Espola, messi, or any of the other fringers of the left or right.

p.s. it's cute you engage in ad hominems and then complain about ad hominems. no one is fooled by it.

p.p.s. my pet theory is that you went into math because of your deficiencies in the verbal arts...it was more comfortable.
Click to expand...

If you are not going to finish the argument, perhaps you shouldn't start it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top