- 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: Nate silver: the slowdown in CV19 cases in NOLA is unlike anything we have seen elsewhere
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:26 pm to Antonio Moss
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:26 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
So instead we should have done nothing where these deaths would have compounded upon one another and COVID deaths would exponentially higher?
king of the strawman
1
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:28 pm to CptRusty
quote:
A) I made it clear in my post that there was a top and bottom range of estimated deaths. Work on that reading comprehension.
You only quoted the top range and based your entire opinion off the top range.
quote:
B) 30k is a revised low estimate number. In early march the low range was 250k.
Completely and utterly false.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:29 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Uh, it's not a "trade". The shutdown reduces both. No shutdown would increase both.
It's as if nobody bothers to think before putting in their two cents.
It's not a matter of the net deaths. We can reduce the number of people that die every year by locking everyone in their homes indefinitely. It's a question of cost vs benefit. The number of people that die from corona virus is not likely to be statistically significant, and the probability that it ever was going to be is looking more and more dubious by the day.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:30 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Could we have had a lot of false positives early on?
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:31 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
You only quoted the top range and based your entire opinion off the top range.
quote:
we were told this was going to be millions of deaths without sheltering in place, and even with the extreme measures still as many as 250k deaths.
so the range is between a high of "millions" and a low of "250k"
learn to fricking read before responding to me again. thanks.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:31 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Remind me the last time we locked down an entire major American city because of influenza.
That's the point, dumbass. He's claiming we overreacted.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:31 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
there is a top and bottom and when you base all your opinions on the top-end range it shows everyone that you are retarded.
The high-end numbers are what convinced politicians to do the shutdown and gave them the cover to do it, and you know it.
We weren't shutting the country down to prevent 50,000 deaths over 5 months.
This post was edited on 4/13/20 at 1:32 pm
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:32 pm to CptRusty
quote:
It's not a matter of the net deaths.
uh...what?
is net deaths not what your original post in this thread was about?
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:32 pm to CptRusty
quote:
So instead we should have done nothing where these deaths would have compounded upon one another and COVID deaths would exponentially higher?
king of the strawman
That is no way a strawman.
The argument was "a wash in deaths makes the decision to shutdown unacceptable"
The problem is that no lockdown would have caused both COVID and non-COVID deaths to increase dramatically. So the idea that you can judge this as a "wash" is absurd.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:33 pm to djrunner
quote:
If it wasn't for shutting everything down, this would have been horrible
lmao you wouldn't even fricking notice anything was going on
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:33 pm to JDPndahizzy
quote:
Cuz eerbody done got it...
This. It's not unreasonable to think that the vast majority of NOLA residents got it by now and most were asymptomatic. At least enough got it where we are starting to get a herd mentality effect.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:33 pm to uway
quote:
We weren't shutting the country down to prevent 30,000 deaths.
Exactly.
The original number that horrified everyone was 2.2 million. Two weeks ago that number was reduced down to 240,000 and included the mitigation efforts. That number has now been reduced to 60,000 or so - essentially the deaths we would encounter in an above average flu season.
We shut down the entire country for this. We were lied to because, quite frankly, they had no idea what the hell this virus would do. So they panicked and press the delete key.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:36 pm to CptRusty
quote:
so the range is between a high of "millions" and a low of "250k"
Which is a complete fricking fabrication.
quote:
learn to fricking read before responding to me again. thanks.
I responded exactly to what you posted. It's not my fault that you don't have a fricking clue what you are talking about, that you just fabricate bullshite because its suits your pathetic arguments, or that don't have the ability to comprehend basic counterpoints to your nonsense.
And I'll respond whenever I feel like it.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:37 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Journalists are not virology or statistical experts.
The predictions were made by doctors and researchers.
quote:No, but there were those who reported hundreds of thousands even with mitigation.
I'd have to go back and look at the transcripts but I'm pretty sure no expert involved with the government said 2.2 million people will die unless we lock down.
That 2.2 million number isn’t one I take seriously.
This post was edited on 4/13/20 at 1:38 pm
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:37 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
We shut down the entire country for this. We were lied to because, quite frankly, they had no idea what the hell this virus would do. So they panicked and press the delete key.
At the very least, they made monumentally import life-changing decisions that affect all citizens based on models that had insufficient data.
Also, ironically, they heavily relied on anecdotal evidence from the virus's impact in Italy.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:39 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Remind me the last time we locked down an entire major American city because of influenza.
That's the point, dumbass. He's claiming we overreacted
Jesus.
Even if we assume that deaths from COVID will be the same as a typical flu season (which they won't be), that number is the direct result of lockdown restrictions which we don't do for flu seasons (with rare exception) which would then result with bringing that number in line with a typical flu season.
You can't just exclude the largest causality in an equation.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:39 pm to CptRusty
quote:That's what you implied by calling it a "trade" of one type of death for another. Best case here is you accidentally used a word that means the exact opposite of what you meant.
It's not a matter of the net deaths.
quote:I agree 100%. You can check my post history to verify. I was not at the beginning and am still not convinced that all this is worth it. But that question is totally independent of the question of whether the shutdown is having its intended effect.
We can reduce the number of people that die every year by locking everyone in their homes indefinitely. It's a question of cost vs benefit.
quote:Except for the fact that in the "hot spots" covid deaths are eclipsing all other CODs combined. The goal is to prevent the entire nation from becoming a hot spot.
The number of people that die from corona virus is not likely to be statistically significant, and the probability that it ever was going to be is looking more and more dubious by the day.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:40 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
The original number that horrified everyone was 2.2 million. Two weeks ago that number was reduced down to 240,000 and included the mitigation efforts. That number has now been reduced to 60,000 or so - essentially the deaths we would encounter in an above average flu season.
This is all inaccurate
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:41 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Except for the fact that in the "hot spots" covid deaths are eclipsing all other CODs combined
Why do you think that is? Do you think that there are really that many coronavirus deaths, or maybe there is something going on with the reporting?
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:42 pm to Salmon
quote:
is net deaths not what your original post in this thread was about?
you are conflating two points.
My original post was that the total number of deaths are unlikely to be significantly different this year than any other year.
The post you are directly quoting is pointing out that there is a cost associated with the measures we have taken and it's not as simple as pointing out that "well the deaths are lower so it's worth it". As uncomfortable as it may be, there is a cost-benefit that needs to be taken into account, otherwise we would do this every time flu season was starting up.
Page 6 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News