- 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: Explain the "flatten the curve" concept
Posted on 4/24/20 at 10:24 pm to yatesdog38
Posted on 4/24/20 at 10:24 pm to yatesdog38
The people who know how to set bones in Podunk are all still willing and able. Unfortunately they have all been furloughed unless they are “ front line” for the new flu.
0
Posted on 4/24/20 at 10:24 pm to Zappas Stache
quote:
Where do you live? Interestingly, in Dallas, the traditional Democrat and Republican both are the biggest proponents of opening things up. The moderates......and I'm talking about the county commissioners......the moderates on each side seem to be the ones voting for lockdown extensions.
That seems odd. The granola folks and the uber-Constitution folks are all about opening but some Dallas Romneys are prevailing? I haven't kept up much with east Texas in a while.
Posted on 4/24/20 at 11:09 pm to East Coast Band
Flattening the curve doesn’t change the area under the curve. I don’t understand how people don’t get that.
Posted on 4/24/20 at 11:24 pm to pleading the fifth
quote:= the number of people who get the virus. Correct?
the area under the curve
So, if the "experts" agree to this mathematical curve as if its going to be a fact, then why are we continuing to flatten the curve so far under what we are worrying about then?
Again, my point is that it seems to be that there is a set number of people who will get this virus, either now or later.
Posted on 4/24/20 at 11:32 pm to East Coast Band
quote:
the number of people who get the virus. Correct?
So, if the "experts" agree to this mathematical curve as if its going to be a fact, then why are we continuing to flatten the curve so far under what we are worrying about then?
Again, my point is that it seems to be that there is a set number of people who will get this virus, either now or later.
That’s my point. You flatten the curve to prevent exceeding healthcare capacity where more people would needlessly die ala Italy and Spain. The numbers stay the same, just prolonged. Only a vaccine could solve that problem.
Posted on 4/24/20 at 11:46 pm to East Coast Band
quote:
So, if the "experts" agree to this mathematical curve as if its going to be a fact,
It's a basic concept.
quote:
my point is that it seems to be that there is a set number of people who will get this virus, either now or later.
Ok....you understand the spine would be bad for health care capacity? Maybe i don't understand your point.
Posted on 4/25/20 at 12:12 am to East Coast Band
Flattening the curve is so three weeks ago. We’ve moved on to “limiting exposure”. Honor Choade plans on delaying restating the economy because he doesn’t care about the economy.
This post was edited on 4/25/20 at 12:15 am
Posted on 4/25/20 at 12:52 am to East Coast Band
I wish we would have gone with the red part of the chart so we could have got this shite over with already. It's not worth sacrificing my luxuries for the unhealthy. frick them.
Posted on 4/25/20 at 3:36 am to East Coast Band
quote:
Since we've not overwhelmed the hospitals, even in NYC, what's the continuing point of "with protective measures",
There is literally no point at all.
In the absence of the healthcare system being stressed beyond its capacity and infected people dying due to lack of proper care, you save literally zero lives by "flattening the curve". The same number of people get infected, just over a longer period of time.
Most states never should have been locked down at all. My state is one of those, and we absolutely shouldn't be locked down no, but our governor is dogshit, so nobody has any focking clue.
Posted on 4/25/20 at 3:37 am to Mr.Perfect
quote:
Flattening the curve is out
Now we are apparently waiting on zero new cases.
Exactly. The goalposts clearly CLEARLY moved.
Posted on 4/25/20 at 3:42 am to Salmon
quote:
y'all are ignoring the need to delay the spikes in order to obtain resources and find an effective treatment schedule
Delay future spikes? Is that actually your answer? Did you have a straight face when typing that?
Because that's just fricking nonsense.
Posted on 4/25/20 at 3:45 am to HamzooReb
quote:
I wish we would have gone with the red part of the chart so we could have got this shite over with already. It's not worth sacrificing my luxuries for the unhealthy. frick them.
I supported a 21 day lockdown, which equals the maximum possible incubation period of 14 days plus a one-week stay in the hospital.
After that, it makes no sense whatsoever.
Posted on 4/25/20 at 4:29 am to ZIGG
quote:
basically it means to stay at home and continue to crush the economy for as long as possible in hopes of putting 100% of the blame on Donald Trump and taking the election in November with a dementia candidate.
This has been the sole aim of the Chinese Flu True Believers from the beginning. Nov 4th this will have mysteriously resolved itself.
Posted on 4/25/20 at 4:32 am to East Coast Band
There are zero Covid 19 patients in the hospital in my town. Zero. City is still on lockdown and the hospital is a ghost town. It’s fricking absurd.
This post was edited on 4/25/20 at 4:33 am
Posted on 4/25/20 at 10:52 am to Hulkklogan
So you're telling me by not having a quarantine that we'd be at 32 million deaths versus 52k? Nah, not buying that.
I didn't say we wouldn't. But the situation would be exponentially better than it is now.
52k deaths so far from this. Over 50% of those deaths are in New York and New Jersey. This lock down was not necessary. I don't care if the death rate would be 5 times what it currently is if we didn't have lock down. The negative economic impacts on the other 320 million people aren't worth it.
quote:
But acting like we'd not see any economic impact even if we didn't lock down is disingenuous.
I didn't say we wouldn't. But the situation would be exponentially better than it is now.
52k deaths so far from this. Over 50% of those deaths are in New York and New Jersey. This lock down was not necessary. I don't care if the death rate would be 5 times what it currently is if we didn't have lock down. The negative economic impacts on the other 320 million people aren't worth it.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News