- 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: phase 2 and 3 reopening predictions?
Posted on 4/18/20 at 11:14 am to PrinceVegeta
Posted on 4/18/20 at 11:14 am to PrinceVegeta
quote:
weed out what wasn’t necessary to begin with.
The government decided that. Not the market. Your hot takes are some of the dumbest on here. And gthog posts here.
0
Posted on 4/18/20 at 11:15 am to Dale51
quote:
The regular flu a couple years back had 43,000,000 cases, 810,000 in hospitals and 62,000 dead Americas.
Why was there not only no shutdown, but no one even gave it a second thought.
Serious question:
What is your explanation for the difference in response?
Your cherry picked example of a really bad flu killed 60k in a season (a year, but not a calendar year).
COVID went from essential 0 to 35k deaths in a month. And this with approximately half the time spent with severe social distancing protocols.
I am not of the opinion we need to wait until a vaccine is developed to reopen. I think some places can slowly start to reopen now and other places (like Louisiana) may have to wait until the beginning of May.
BUT only the most obstinate, fact-resistant people refuse to realize that COVID is a big problem and much worse than the flu.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 11:15 am to SickGainzLP
quote:
Had we done nothing as so many of you demand the numbers would be considerably higher.
Yes. Those numbers are in the models, too. Not that you’ve read any of it.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 11:16 am to BigJim
quote:
Your cherry picked example of a really bad flu killed 60k in a season (a year, but not a calendar year).
Do you think the flu mortalities are spread evenly over a year? Have you ever heard of flu season?
Posted on 4/18/20 at 11:29 am to the808bass
It turns out way more Americans socially distanced themselves and to greater extremes than were predicted. Once again, there's nothing magical here... We have ample data on what occurred where this virus hit with no social distancing in place. It wasn't good or sustainable.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 11:42 am to SickGainzLP
quote:
It turns out way more Americans socially distanced themselves and to greater extremes than were predicted.
So the death toll without social distancing would be roughly double. Not a factor of 50 larger. Or do you disagree with science?
Posted on 4/18/20 at 11:59 am to PrinceVegeta
quote:
PrinceVagina
leave the trolling to el Gaucho, he's a pro at it. Oh, and GFY !
Posted on 4/18/20 at 12:31 pm to the808bass
quote:
Do you think the flu mortalities are spread evenly over a year? Have you ever heard of flu season?
So 6 months then. You are still comparing 60k deaths over 6 months to 30k deaths over 1 month. That's still 3x as much.
And as you point out those deaths aren't evenly distributed. It's more of a bell shaped curve i.e. the first (and last) month will have fewer cases. So if anything, the 3x estimate is an understatement.
AND you are still comparing apples to oranges since COVID is spreading under massive social distancing.
I get and even agree with "it's time to open up" line of thinking.
I understand even though I don't necessarily agree with the "we overreacted" line of thought.
But the "it's just flu" line of thinking doesn't comport with the facts.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 1:58 pm to the808bass
I know that models by definition are not an exact science and are based on assumptions. You don't seem to.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:05 pm to BigJim
U.S. flu season lasts on average 13 weeks.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:07 pm to SickGainzLP
quote:
I know that models by definition are not an exact science and are based on assumptions. You don't seem to.
I do know that. I also know that when a modeler predicts 1M fatalities with social distancing and that ends up being wrong by an order of 10-20, that model was shite. And that the modeler has no idea of the effect of the virus or the social distancing.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:10 pm to BigJim
quote:
But the "it's just flu" line of thinking doesn't comport with the facts.
I can agree with this. It isn’t just the flu. But it’s far closer to the flu than it is to the big scary monster they’ve projected it to be.
If the flu claims 60k lives in a really bad years and this claims 80k, it’s still closer to a bad flu than it is to the end of the world.
And none of it justified a $6T or more tanking.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:11 pm to PrinceVegeta
quote:
PrinceVegeta
Found a retard.
My god you are such a bitch, your existence and all the people like you are embarrassments to humanity.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:12 pm to PrinceVegeta
quote:
I’m not trying to rustle any jimmies; it’s just rudimentary epidemiological forecasting. The sooner you accept this current state of affairs, the sooner you can plan and envision your life accordingly in such a way as to maximize your quality of life until the return to pre-COVID-19 normalcy. There’s no reason to be emotionally obstinate. It is what it is.
Wishcasters and skyscreamers..muh
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:16 pm to the808bass
The modelers were extremely transparent about the fact that there were a lot of unknowns. They've also conceded that they didn't anticipate nearly this level of compliance. Hell, even the sky screamers populating this forum are mostly compliant.
What are you suggesting exactly? That the decisions based on the models were incorrect? That the decision makers used the models as parametric estimations instead of analogous? I'm not sure there is any reasonable basis for that other than frustration.
What are you suggesting exactly? That the decisions based on the models were incorrect? That the decision makers used the models as parametric estimations instead of analogous? I'm not sure there is any reasonable basis for that other than frustration.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:18 pm to PJinAtl
anecdotal
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:18 pm to SickGainzLP
Lol. That’s bullshite.
Modelers: “Without social distancing - 2M deaths. With social distancing - 1M deaths.”
Us: “Um. We’re looking more like 60k?”
Modelers: “Whoa. You guys are awesome at social distancing!”
It’s moronic. Your inability to admit that just shows your own idiocy.
Modelers: “Without social distancing - 2M deaths. With social distancing - 1M deaths.”
Us: “Um. We’re looking more like 60k?”
Modelers: “Whoa. You guys are awesome at social distancing!”
It’s moronic. Your inability to admit that just shows your own idiocy.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:20 pm to the808bass
You are speaking in platitudes and attributing "the modelers" to me specifically. You are just frustrated and venting. That or you didn't understand the purpose of those early models in the first place. It isn't really that difficult to understand but the first step is a desire.... Which you do not have. Do you man.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:23 pm to SickGainzLP
But I’ve actually read them. So I’m way ahead of you. And I’m not an idiot. So even further ahead.
Posted on 4/18/20 at 2:24 pm to BoomNation
Allowing businesses to open and having a customer base that will partake in said businesses are two different things.
I’m still concerned that even if everything is open up tomorrow, only around 30% of the population feels comfortable with it. We aren’t going to see the Superdome at max capacity this year.
I’m still concerned that even if everything is open up tomorrow, only around 30% of the population feels comfortable with it. We aren’t going to see the Superdome at max capacity this year.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News