- 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 1:43 pm to djrunner
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:43 pm to djrunner
quote:
You tell me Sparky. Based on your knowledge of this disease, if we wouldn't have shut down everything how would it have been?
Knowing that Schools and Airlines have been two of the incubating places for this disease, tell me if just those two aspects of our normal lives would not have been shut down how much worse this could have been and why.
You said it would have been horrible. Presumably, you made that statement based on some understanding of how bad it would have been. What is your understanding? I haven't disagreed with you. I'm trying to understand what you mean by "horrible".
Would deaths be double? Triple? Quadruple? Ten times worse, etc.
Obviously, you must have some idea since you know it would have been horrible.
0
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:43 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
This is all inaccurate
I would expect a chicken little like yourself to go back on your fake truths. Everything that was done from mid-March onward was based on the Imperial College model. That model called for 2.2 million Americans to die. Now I'm not sure if the original models included mitigation in their projections, but it's a known fact that the figures cited by Trump two weeks ago did include those mitigation efforts.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:43 pm to Scruffy
quote:
The predictions were made by doctors and researchers.
The models were, of course. But they weren't the ones going on camera and spotting 2.2 million deaths as almost inevitable.
quote:
No, but there were those who reported hundreds of thousands even with mitigation.
That 2.2 million number isn’t one I take seriously.
180,000 deaths on the top range. I don't think we get there, obviously, but it isn't like that number is crazy out-of-the question.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:45 pm to VolsOut4Harambe
quote:
LaToya is Ghana take credit for this.
Can she turn this into an Income tax credit?
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:46 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
See, that's the thing about model ranges - 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.
On what did the decision makers base their decisions? If they made their decisions based on the worst case scenario, are they "retarded"?
Without realizing it, you are agreeing with a lot of people you are trying to mock.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:46 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
But they weren't the ones going on camera and spotting 2.2 million deaths as almost inevitable.
You're correct. They were going on camera and saying this would be a nothingburger back in January. Just look at Fauci's interviews from January/February that he did with CNN. He was only booked on those shows, however, because Trump had shut down travel to China and they were attempting to make him look bad.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:46 pm to LSUFanHouston
quote:
This. It's not unreasonable to think that the vast majority of NOLA residents got it by now and most were asymptomatic.
That's actually incredibly unreasonable lol.
80% or more of those tested, test negative.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:46 pm to CptRusty
quote:
you are conflating two points.
no you are using net deaths to make your argument for the other "point" that you went ranting about after I simply told you that making the net deaths a wash was kinda the point
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:47 pm to TigerstuckinMS
quote:
Less infectious/virulent strains get selected for because we quit taking extreme measures to stop their spread if they don't burn through us like wildfire or kill us until we are dead.
They get selected for because they don't rapidly kill the host, which allows for more of its progeny to be spread for a longer period of time.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:47 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?
Maybe. How much higher would they have been?
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:48 pm to jchamil
quote:There are really that many covid deaths.
Do you think that there are really that many coronavirus deaths, or maybe there is something going on with the reporting?
Are you really suggesting that health departments all around the country and the world are basically completely staffed by liars and people that don't give a frick about ethics or integrity?
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:48 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
o the range is between a high of "millions" and a low of "250k"
Which is a complete fricking fabricatio
Read em and weep, you fricking idiot:
LINK
quote:
The White House coronavirus response coordinator said Monday that she is "very worried about every city in the United States" and projects 100,000 to 200,000 American deaths as a best case scenario.
quote:
Birx said the projections by Dr. Anthony Fauci that U.S. deaths could range from 1.6 million to 2.2 million is a worst case scenario if the country did "nothing" to contain the outbreak, but said even "if we do things almost perfectly," she still predicts up to 200,000 U.S. deaths.
This post was edited on 4/13/20 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:51 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
I would expect a chicken little like yourself to go back on your fake truths. Everything that was done from mid-March onward was based on the Imperial College model. That model called for 2.2 million Americans to die. Now I'm not sure if the original models included mitigation in their projections, but it's a known fact that the figures cited by Trump two weeks ago did include those mitigation efforts.
This is what happens when you get your news from people like Candance Owens.
The 2.2 million was the extreme upper range of the UK Imperial College model that was an absolute "worst-case scenario" where absolutely no mitigation efforts took place. To my knowledge, the IC model for the US has never been revised.
The White House has not based any action on the Imperial College Model.
It has used the IMHE model - along with various other models. The IMHE model is the model that accounts for social restrictions. That model's first run had an upper range of 180,000 and a median projection of 82,000 deaths.
That model has been revised four times based on new data and the upper end model has dropped to 141,000 as of last run - 180,000-141,000.
The median projection has dropped from 82,000 to 60,000 in that same time frame.
So, no, there has never been a situation where the models said there could be 2.2 million deaths and then revised it down to 60,000.
It's a complete and utter fabrication that was put out there by people like Candance Owens and Britt Hume and then parrotted by hundreds of thousands of people that were too lazy to look up the facts for themselves.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:51 pm to CptRusty
I don't see anything in those quotes that says 250k was the low end prediction with extreme measures implemented.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:52 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
It's a complete and utter fabrication that was put out there by people like Candance Owens and Britt Hume and then parrotted by hundreds of thousands of people that were too lazy to look up the facts for themselves.
Ya hate to see it
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:53 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
I don't see anything in those quotes that says 250k was the low end prediction with extreme measures implemented.
quote:
, but said even "if we do things almost perfectly," she still predicts up to 200,000 U.S. deaths.
200k.
I was going off of the top of my head with 250. If they can revise numbers, so can I.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:54 pm to moneyg
quote:
Maybe. How much higher would they have been?
Which ones? COVID or non-COVID.
You would imagine that non-COVID would rise close to historical averages unless hospitals overwhelmed which would then cause them to spike.
And increasing COVID hospitalizations would have done just that which causes their deaths to spike.
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:54 pm to CptRusty
So is 200 the high end?
You just said 250 was the LOW end
You just said 250 was the LOW end
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:54 pm to CptRusty
quote:
Read em and weep, you fricking idiot:
quote:
she still predicts up to 200,000 U.S. deaths
Since when does "up to" mean "at least"?
Posted on 4/13/20 at 1:55 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
I don't see anything in those quotes that says 250k was the low end prediction with extreme measures implemented.
He literally posted evidence to my point
Page 7 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News