- 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 has now killed more Americans in 1 month than flu killed in entire year
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:11 pm to Apollyon
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:11 pm to Apollyon
quote:Ok, if you want to do that math that way, "covid season" may also prove to be only 6 months, possibly the same as flu oct-mar. And you want to start at this past january, well before covid had even started to register as a blip. 18 months from then will catch only 1 real season. The advantage is to you.
3 years of flu cut in half is 9 months.
Each flu season is 6 months max.
And then I cut in half, further advantage to you.
quote:Sucks that your math and logic skills are so poor.
You declined a bet slanted in your favor. Sucks your confidence is that poor. Because I am VERY right.
1
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:12 pm to Korkstand
So thats a no.
Good luck with your 300k-500k (10x flu season) estimate.
Its wrong.
Good luck with your 300k-500k (10x flu season) estimate.
Its wrong.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:13 pm to Apollyon
quote:No. Either you are stupid, or you think I'm stupid. And I'm not stupid.
You agreeing to the 18 months?
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:14 pm to Korkstand
quote:
No.
Yeah. I already figured that.
Your money and your mouth remain separate.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:18 pm to Apollyon
quote:First, 10X an average flu season, as I stated, would be 300k period. If you want to expand the range, you have to do it in both directions.
Good luck with your 300k-500k (10x flu season) estimate.
Its wrong.
Second, I have made it very clear multiple times that I consider 10X to be the MAX, and that my real guess is 5X (0.5% IFR).
I really don't understand how you can be so blatantly dishonest.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:19 pm to Apollyon
quote:No, my money and your words in my mouth remain separate.
Your money and your mouth remain separate.
I have already accepted the other bet that is in your favor.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:20 pm to Korkstand
We are good. There is no bet, clearly, as terms can't be met.
We will have to agree to disagree on your outrageous estimates of covid death tallies.
We will have to agree to disagree on your outrageous estimates of covid death tallies.
This post was edited on 4/19/20 at 8:21 pm
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:21 pm to Korkstand
quote:
have already accepted the other bet that is in your favor.
Ban + 1k?
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:22 pm to Apollyon
quote:Yep.
Ban + 1k?
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:24 pm to Korkstand
Oct 2020 to Mar 2021.
US Covid deaths only during those months must exceed by tenfold seasonal influenza deaths.
1k to me if they don't and you don't post anymore.
Is that correct?
US Covid deaths only during those months must exceed by tenfold seasonal influenza deaths.
1k to me if they don't and you don't post anymore.
Is that correct?
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:26 pm to Korkstand
Boom. Done.
Bookmarked.
Bookmarked.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:29 pm to Grim
quote:No way to really know that because of the way the deaths are being counted
Coronavirus has now killed more Americans in 1 month than flu killed in entire year
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:31 pm to Apollyon
quote:That'll work. And given that I think it'll be more like 5X, I'd say your odds of winning are probably 80+%.
Oct 2020 to Mar 2021.
US Covid deaths only during those months must exceed by tenfold seasonal influenza deaths.
1k to me if they don't and you don't post anymore.
Is that correct?
But like I said, I took the under 1.6 million against some dipshit on the OT for $1k, so I'll either pay you with his money, pay him with yours, or I'll collect $2k.
And if I have to ban myself from this place, that's just a bonus.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:32 pm to Korkstand
Cheers mate.
Thanks for the grand
Thanks for the grand
Posted on 4/19/20 at 9:27 pm to Apollyon
quote:The study design is in question too, as it relates to the representativeness of the sample compared to the county’s populations to be able to generalize it.
The question surrounds how good the antibody assay was, not how rigorous the study design was.
Specifically, their sample:
1. Was recruited via Facebook ads.
2. The Facebook ads were targeted.
3. Their sample was self-selected from there.
So we know how targeted Facebook ads, to creepy if not disturbing levels that have caused people to advocate for legislation to prevent them from being able to use our private data.
Therefore, it’s most likely going to target people with an internet history related to COVID-19, specifically those who searched about symptoms and contact risk for transmission, and it was probably even more likely to target people who searched COVID-19 testing.
So those who got the ads are probably more likely to have had symptoms, believed they had a contact that put them at-risk, and wanted to get tested.
And then from there, people had to volunteer to participate and then actually participate, which includes driving to a location and getting a needle prick. As hard as it is to get people to participate in simple survey studies that take a few minutes from their own home even with an offer of rewards (or a chance at rewards), this study involved a lot more effort (plus people typically don’t like having to get pricked by a needle).
In addition, we know from surveys that there often a response bias based on how personal the topic is to them. I’m more likely to respond to a survey about sports and head injuries, because I got knocked out of a football game after getting earholed, than a survey about sports and ankle injuries because I never had one.
Therefore, the same is likely here. If a person didn’t have any symptoms, never had any known contacts with anyone who was positive and/or was displaying symptoms, and had been chilling at home in isolation the last few weeks, then that person is probably not as likely to volunteer as someone who had symptoms, had contact with someone who was positive, wanted to get tested, but wasn’t able to.
So if 20 their 50 positives (out of 3330; 1.5%), were true positives (more like only 5 were true positives though), but those 20 were 2.5 times more likely to be infected than the general population (only 8), than their original crude rate of is 6.25 times higher than the population (0.24%), which would only have been 4.8 times higher than their confirmed case rate.
But in reality, since 45 were likely false positives, and only 5 were true positives, then 2 were likely true positives and even if 1 was a false negative, then 3 out of 3330 would put their crude rate at only 1.8 times the confirmed case rate.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 9:56 pm to Apollyon
quote:Which already assumes that the current CFR of 5.3% is 5.3 times higher than that 1% IFR to get to 10 times the flu’s 0.1% IFR. And that CFR will undoubtedly increase, but regardless, let’s look at a country that did mass testing and tracing and has reopened their society: South Korea.
You claimed, multiple times, coronavirus to be 10x seasonal flu mortality.
South Korea currently has a CFR or 2.2% (236 deaths out of 10,674), and that has been gradually rising since despite adding few cases over the last few weeks (less than 29.1 per day; 0.28% daily increase) people are still dying (1.87 per day; 0.85% daily increase), likely because some people can take months (2 died in the last 2 weeks from the Princess Cruise, 2 months later).
Regardless, because they instituted a mass test and trace program (and isolation), only 1.9% is their tests have come back positive, compared to about 20% here.
In other words, only about 1 out of every 53 people they tested, was positive. So it’s hard to say that they were missing a lot of cases, when they proactively tested, traced contacts (and tested them), and isolated them from spreading. And they weren’t just testing symptomatic cases because of that. And such a low positive rate on top of that, despite testing the individuals most likely to have it, without any testing shortages, only confirms that.
Furthermore, their proactive policy, is likely to have decreased the fatality as they were able to more effectively allocate resources and better prevent the most at-risk from getting it in the first place.
Despite all of that they still have a 2.2% (and likely to rise still) CFR. So just to get to a 1% IFR, that means 2.2 times as many people had it then tested, and therefore, they only tested 45.2% of the actually cases. That may be plausible, but even missing 55% of the cases seems pretty hard to do given their data.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 10:35 pm to Grim
GRIM....... 
:lol: :lol: 
:lol: :lol: 
Posted on 4/19/20 at 10:47 pm to Grim
So many gaping pussies fearful of their own mortality.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 10:50 pm to musick
quote:
Coronavirus has infected, at least, 742,459 people in the United States.
How is this known?
Posted on 4/19/20 at 10:52 pm to La Place Mike
I would guess its higher than that thus dropping the death rate. Many people have been exposed and either had 0 symptoms or thought it was the flu.
Page 17 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News