- 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
re: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) ***W.H.O. DECLARES A GLOBAL PANDEMIC***
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:15 am to Ronaldo Burgundiaz
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:15 am to Ronaldo Burgundiaz
This still depends on where/how it it’s.
It caught SK off guard in a massive church with younger attendees (look at the #of people in their 20’s that have it there).
If we can keep this out of older communities, we’ll look more like SK, if not, then who knows?
Italy and SK have also largely kept it to singular regions. With New Orleans now popping off we’re building hot spots this thing on multiple coasts.
It also can’t be ignored that mutations and multiple strains One of the explanations from China was that the version circulating around non-Wuhan China was the less deadly strain.
It caught SK off guard in a massive church with younger attendees (look at the #of people in their 20’s that have it there).
If we can keep this out of older communities, we’ll look more like SK, if not, then who knows?
Italy and SK have also largely kept it to singular regions. With New Orleans now popping off we’re building hot spots this thing on multiple coasts.
It also can’t be ignored that mutations and multiple strains One of the explanations from China was that the version circulating around non-Wuhan China was the less deadly strain.
0
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:16 am to ell_13
quote:
That percentage can be affected by demographics. A country with many more older people will have a higher death rate generally. It just depends on where the clusters pop up. Like that nursing home in Washington which made up 16 of the first 22 American deaths.
He seems to think that's irrelevant
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:16 am to WaWaWeeWa
Dear Facebook,
It would be really cool to get back to the thoughtful insights and links to breaking stories than the argumentative trash that this thread has become. Glad to see WaWa and Vol still hanging in there
It would be really cool to get back to the thoughtful insights and links to breaking stories than the argumentative trash that this thread has become. Glad to see WaWa and Vol still hanging in there
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:17 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
Why is the percentage not the same in every country?
Because of a lot of different factors. But in the Italy and SK data sets it’s mainly because most of the patients in the Italy data are old and most in the SK data are young and female.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:18 am to WaWaWeeWa
I’d like to see the average age of the males vs females data. If the average comes out to men being 5-8 years higher, that could be explain the death rate difference. My point is there’s certainly proof that age plays a factor; I’m not sold that gender does yet.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:18 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
Because of a lot of different factors.
Like demos and density
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:19 am to LNCHBOX
Density doesn’t affect rate of death just rate of transfer.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:20 am to rds dc
quote:
NEW U.S. TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS ON BRITAIN, IRELAND LIKELY TO GO INTO EFFECT ON MONDAY NIGHT - U.S. AND AIRLINE OFFICIALS
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:20 am to ell_13
Thank you. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:21 am to ell_13
quote:
The Spanish fricking flu didn’t get to half of that. Just 27%. My god man chill out.
Lok. I have no clue where this will end up in the population base but your Spanish Flu comparison is retarded.
They didn't have the means of travel or the population density that we have and it still spread like wildfire.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:21 am to ell_13
quote:
Density doesn’t affect rate of death just rate of transfer.
Unless of course lower density keeps it from ever getting to high risk demos.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:21 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
Thank you. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.
You just aren't great at critical thinking.
Remember that you said it had little to nothing to do with the deaths. That is absurd
This post was edited on 3/14/20 at 11:22 am
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:25 am to mjax57
quote:
I’m going off published data from models. They are predicting 160 to 210 million people could become infected in 1 year if it isn’t slowed down at 1%. These are the experts in the field, you’re so emotional and dramatic.
You are misrepresenting this. These are NOT predictive models you are citing; they are projective models. For example, I have a spreadsheet that projects what my retirement account will be worth 20 years from now. I have a cell with an assumed growth rate. If I put 8% in that cell we could call it predictive, because that rate has some historical merit. But if I put 20% in my spreadsheet it becomes a projection, and not a very useful one.
The models showing 160 million Americans infected are just like that. They built models and put a wide variety of factors in many different runs. One of the extremely improbable ones returned 160 million, and that’s the one you are citing. That’s silly at best, and more likely tendentious.
This is just like the stupid global warming models that the media swooned over back in the 1990’s. They put a carbon forcing temperature change of 6 degrees C into their stupid models, and they returned ridiculous projections that the media ran with. The actual temperatures always proved embarrassing to alarmists, but it was all because they stuck an absurdly high carbon forcing temperature change into their models.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:25 am to rds dc
And people laughed at preppers...
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:25 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
Remember that you said it had little to nothing to do with the deaths. That is absurd
The mortality RATE. Not total number of deaths
I’m going to tell you something that is really going to blow your mind. Are you ready for this? Italy is doing a better job than South Korea. I know I won’t ever to be able to explain it to you but I just want you to think about that.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:28 am to VABuckeye
quote:Yeah. The world war kept people away from each other.
They didn't have the means of travel or the population density that we have and it still spread like wildfire.
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:28 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
The mortality RATE. Not total number of deaths
Your condescension is hilarious. Tell me something oh genius of definitions, will the rate remain constant if the number of deaths changes with no other changes?
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:33 am to LNCHBOX
I’m going to answer you question so you don’t accuse me of a avoiding it: No, the rate will change.
But I think we should end this because we can’t agree on basic math
But I think we should end this because we can’t agree on basic math
Posted on 3/14/20 at 11:33 am to Burhead
quote:
Have we discussed the post-recovery of people with OVID-19? Early data out of Hong Kong says that out of 12 people 2-3 suffered a 20-30% drop in lung capacity.
We did a while back in the thread. If a doctor can't tell me if it is 2 or 3 out of a group of 12, I don't trust much else they say.
Page 670 of 1190
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News