- 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: Running average of 49 worldwide antibody studies is showing a mortality rate of 0.23%
Posted on 5/8/20 at 6:39 am to buffbraz
Posted on 5/8/20 at 6:39 am to buffbraz
quote:
Does not equal going to to the grocery store, to work, on the subway,etc.... Again, if someone or a “fairy” was bringing them groceries and they still got infected, was the lockdown even successful? Seems like a reasonable question.
I mean, are we not using common sense today? People have to eat. While some people certainly could stay in their home all day for months, most dont. They have 8 mil people, it’s not unreasonable that 600 a day are getting sick by barely seeing other people.
I’d also be curious if they may have shared HVAC systems?
This virus spreads human to human. So somehow someway the vast majority of them had human contact. Your guess is as good as mine how that happened.
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 6:40 am
1
Posted on 5/8/20 at 6:41 am to ell_13
quote:
The is the whole point. 0.23% mortality does NOT require the reaction it got. Nothing should have ever been closed. All we had to do was tell people to wash more, make sure they stayed home when sick, and tell the old people to quarantine in the meantime.
This x 1000.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 6:44 am to baldona
Ventilation systems should definitely be looked at as a source of spread.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 6:56 am to Cosmo
quote:
Politicians making decisions believe that
politicians also suck at having real jobs... so they became politicians.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 7:23 am to buffbraz
quote:
Are we to assume people are lying?
Considering New York had a "narc on your neighbors" hotline, I would not be surprised to learn that people lied in regards to their social activity.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 7:27 am to Powerman
As I’ve been looking at the various stats, I wonder if the best medical system in the world is keeping people alive that would already be dead in other countries (and not just RBG). Since that seems beyond question, and much of the US mortality is among those with significant pre-existing conditions, won’t that skew our mortality numbers?
tl;dr America has been keeping fatties alive to be killed by Covid
tl;dr America has been keeping fatties alive to be killed by Covid
Posted on 5/8/20 at 8:16 am to Korkstand
quote:
I think it was and still is taken seriously.
It absolutely was not. What major media outlet or press conference discussed the data? What policymakers cited this data in the decision making process?
quote:
But while it is a decent size sample, it's really not big enough to extrapolate to the rest of the world.
And the sample sizes that produced models calling for millions of people to die and a 4% death rate?
quote:
but just taking the raw numbers 19% of the population was infected, and the CFR was 2%. That is very high, and likely due to the age skew as you mentioned.
Unless they’ve updated from the original article, 634 out of 3711 people were infected. That’s 17%. But regardless if 17 or 19, that’s a very low infection rate for a supposedly highly contagious virus with no natural immunity that was allowed to spread unchecked for several days in the closest real world example to a human controlled environment that exists.
The mortality rate was 1.9% for people with symptoms. For all infected passengers it was 0.9%. The report used those numbers along with some age demographics to extrapolate a 0.5% mortality rate for the general population.
All of this data was available to the general public on March 5, well before any lockdowns started.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 8:19 am to Open Your Eyes
quote:
All of this data was available to the general public on March 5, well before any lockdowns started.
Why do you care more about money than people dying?
Posted on 5/8/20 at 8:19 am to Centinel
quote:
Why do you care more about money than people dying?
"If it saves one life..."
Posted on 5/8/20 at 8:26 am to Korkstand
quote:
That's not enough to draw any sort of conclusion.
I disagree. Also much better data than whatever the powers that be used to shut down everything.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 9:54 am to Centinel
quote:
Why do you care more about money than people dying?
Its not about money. Holy hell people get over this. Its about the ability to live and not be controlled by the government. Its about not relying on future government tax income to pay for peoples food and bills right now. Money is a necessity in todays world because we specialize in tasks and don't grow our own food.
Its about the ability to leave our house and go try to work in order to support myself and my family.
Furthermore, its about me taking care of myself and you taking care of yourself. Its not my responsibility to take care of you, and the basis that it is is socialism.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 3:44 pm to Open Your Eyes
quote:What does the media have to do with whether the data was/is taken seriously?
It absolutely was not. What major media outlet or press conference discussed the data?
quote:I don't think policymakers used ANY real data in the decision making process.
What policymakers cited this data in the decision making process?
quote:I don't believe any legit model said the death rate was anywhere near 4% since probably February.
And the sample sizes that produced models calling for millions of people to die and a 4% death rate?
quote:Last I saw it was over 700, but yes I agree that is a low infection rate. And I believe it is realistic considering NYC's antibody study resulted in a similar figure.
Unless they’ve updated from the original article, 634 out of 3711 people were infected. That’s 17%. But regardless if 17 or 19, that’s a very low infection rate for a supposedly highly contagious virus with no natural immunity that was allowed to spread unchecked for several days in the closest real world example to a human controlled environment that exists.
quote:I have been settled on the 0.5% estimation for a while, myself. This jives with the NYC data again, since ~20-25% of the NYC population gives about 1.5-2 million infected, and 14k deaths falls in the 0.6-0.8% range.
The mortality rate was 1.9% for people with symptoms. For all infected passengers it was 0.9%. The report used those numbers along with some age demographics to extrapolate a 0.5% mortality rate for the general population.
quote:FYI I don't believe we should have shut down much if at all.
All of this data was available to the general public on March 5, well before any lockdowns started.
Page 8 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News