- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:04 am to lsu13lsu
Last week this thread was regularly falling off the front page. Now it's staying at the top again. The CDC should be monitoring it as a barometer of public sentiment.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:07 am to Jim Rockford
What's up with this posted on AP wire.
"Hubei province reported 14,840 new cases Thursday, compared to 1,638 new cases the day before. Hubei also reported 242 new deaths, more than double the 94 reported on Wednesday"
"Hubei province reported 14,840 new cases Thursday, compared to 1,638 new cases the day before. Hubei also reported 242 new deaths, more than double the 94 reported on Wednesday"
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:08 am to TigerFanatic99
quote:
'Q' thread is lit.
I don’t trust anything from the media, government, or people who challenge my theories. However I do trust unverified random sources on the internet, message boards, and twitter. What could go wrong.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:09 am to Boat Motor Bandit
quote:
"Hubei province reported 14,840 new cases Thursday, compared to 1,638 new cases the day before. Hubei also reported 242 new deaths, more than double the 94 reported on Wednesday"
They changed the reporting criteria.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:12 am to Dizz
quote:
I don’t trust anything from the media, government, or people who challenge my theories. However I do trust unverified random sources on the internet, message boards, and twitter. What could go wrong.
My favorite Q-er rationalization: when my sources are wrong they aren’t wrong, it’s deliberate misinformation to keep skeptics like you off of our trail.
This was told to me almost verbatim with a straight face.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:12 am to Boat Motor Bandit
quote:
"Hubei province reported 14,840 new cases Thursday, compared to 1,638 new cases the day before. Hubei also reported 242 new deaths, more than double the 94 reported on Wednesday"
WTF
I guess sending everyone back to work on the 3rd didn't work out like expected......bunch of propaganda motherfrickers.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:16 am to Jim Rockford
quote:
They changed the reporting criteria.
A death is a death. I’m not sure the criteria matters. It’s probably under reported because there is no way they have the resources to test all these patients
I think there is going to be a good bit of crow eaten in the thread
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:20 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
A death is a death. I’m not sure the criteria matters. It’s probably under reported because there is no way they have the resources to test all these patients
In Hubei, every case of pneumonia is being counted as Covid now, as is every pneumonia death. They don't need a positive test.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:24 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
A death is a death. I’m not sure the criteria matters.
How could it not?
As I understand it, they are no longer only counting lab confirmed deaths, but including presumed coronavirus.
Criteria ALWAYS matters, and as a result we need to wait and see that the trend goes from here. Yesterday’s data (and going forward), cant be applied to past data.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:25 am to Jim Rockford
Correct. Because most of those deaths are likely covid. Are a few standard pneumonia? Maybe. But in the epicenter of the disease I think it’s appropriate to be conservative and say every pneumonia death is likely covid if you can’t test every single case which they very quickly will not be able to based on shear numbers of infected
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:26 am to WaWaWeeWa
I like how you agree with him disagreeing with something you said. 
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:29 am to Volvagia
What did he disagree with me about?
He made a factual statement that I agreed with
I just gave my opinion that it’s a more appropriate approach in the epicenter of disease rather then underestimating cases because they are unable to test all of the patients due to an overwhelmed system.
Now you wouldn’t want to do something like that in the US where we have only had a handful of cases.
Is there anything you disagree with?
He made a factual statement that I agreed with
I just gave my opinion that it’s a more appropriate approach in the epicenter of disease rather then underestimating cases because they are unable to test all of the patients due to an overwhelmed system.
Now you wouldn’t want to do something like that in the US where we have only had a handful of cases.
Is there anything you disagree with?
This post was edited on 2/13/20 at 10:31 am
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:33 am to WaWaWeeWa
You just said that you believe they are going to have to under report deaths because no way they can test for them all.
He replies they no longer require lab testing for a death to count against the coronavirus toll (thus negating your premise of underreporting).
You: “Correct.”
He replies they no longer require lab testing for a death to count against the coronavirus toll (thus negating your premise of underreporting).
You: “Correct.”
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:44 am to Volvagia
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:47 am to crap4brain
That is an extremely shitty graph.
How many US cases again? Because I see no way to interpret it other than more than around 500, when it’s at 15.
Same problem on the other one.
The superimposed layer should be flipped.
How many US cases again? Because I see no way to interpret it other than more than around 500, when it’s at 15.
Same problem on the other one.
The superimposed layer should be flipped.
This post was edited on 2/13/20 at 10:48 am
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:51 am to Volvagia
quote:
You just said that you believe they are going to have to under report deaths because no way they can test for them all.
No i said they were previously (under old criteria) likely under reporting deaths and cases because the numbers of cases were limited by the number of tests that could be performed. That quickly becomes maxed out because of limited resources. Thus it’s a bad criteria and the reason for the change.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:53 am to Jim Rockford
quote:Dead has always been the same definition.
They changed the reporting criteria.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:53 am to crap4brain
That's a great example of how to not make a chart. The "Cases in the U.S." points to red line that implies the US has around 500 confirmed cases. I have no idea what that is trying to show regarding US cases.
Posted on 2/13/20 at 10:54 am to rds dc
quote:
apan had an 80 year old woman die and then test positive for coronavirus. First death there.
First in a 1st world country... although was diagnosed after, so likely wasn’t treated properly. Plus she was 80
Page 190 of 1190
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News