Originally posted by Newjak
Getting close to 2000 deaths a day again. Probably going to be worse after Thanksgiving because of the idiots choosing to be done.We'll probably be back in lockdown before the year is over.
Lockdowns aren't helping. The data supports social distancing, and free movement of medical professionals.
They also give governments way too much economic power.
Originally posted by Newjak
This is so dumb to celebrate.They can accept the fact these business owners are dumb and part of the reason we've had some of the worst response to this pandemic in the world.
Not as dumb as going out to celebrate a Biden victory, I'm sure you agree. And the time of "well they were wearing masks" is over with. A pass will no longer be granted for mask wearing unless everyone was also social distancing.
A problem is there are people(private citizens and some in positions of power in the government) who think these business owners are dumb while at the same time feeling it's okay to go out and protest or celebrate a Biden victory.
It just can't work that way. And mayors and governors cannot participate in some protests and celebrations and then turn around and pull this kind of bullshit.
It's why people are saying "f*ck it". So yep I'm celebrating the city of NYC rightfully being told to f*ck off and keep f*cking off.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Yup, yup!👆 👆
Oh and you know how certain posters here love to cry about gaslighting? Let us see if they will be consistent and call this out:
NEW YORK GOVERNOR ANDREW M. CUOMO TO RECEIVE 2020 INTERNATIONAL EMMY® FOUNDERS AWARD
Spoiler alert: They won't.
Originally posted by Surtur
Oh and you know how certain posters here love to cry about gaslighting? Let us see if they will be consistent and call this out:NEW YORK GOVERNOR ANDREW M. CUOMO TO RECEIVE 2020 INTERNATIONAL EMMY® FOUNDERS AWARD
Spoiler alert: They won't.
Damn, I guess I should kill tens of thousands of people with disastrous pandemic policies so I can win awards.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Damn, that's smart.I wish I was evil enough to be a Democrat.
Takes a special kind of evil. Lol, kunt allowed riots for months:
#Unity
#Healing
Originally posted by dadudemon
Today is an important day for Q4 2020 on COVID-19 deaths.If we see an increase (from 7 days ago), the trends in new cases were predictive.
If we see a decrease (from 7 days ago), the trends in new cases are weakly predictive. Meaning, we won't see 4,000 deaths in a single day, 11-20 days from Nov 20th (where we hit peak new cases).
For anyone interested in this, we don't want people dying. We want to see trends where if people test positive, proportionally, people don't die in direct proportions like we saw in April.
In the beginning of the Pandemic, in the US, new cases were highly predictive of deaths. "The death lag" as it is called. These days, because of how much testing we are doing, the predictive power is much weaker. If I have time, I can do an "r-squared" analysis to see how accurate it is at different points.
We saw an increase in cases. However, they were not proportional to the new cases. So we landed somewhere between the two extremes (that there is no correlation vs. there is a strong correlation).
Also, heard a great idea for a stimulus bill that should get passed: as long as daily deaths average over 100 for a rolling 7 day period, for the entire US, all income and payroll taxes are dismissed. And this is a rather easy formula:
((52 weeks - number (x) of weeks with over 100 COVID-19 deaths)/52) * your final total tax burden for that year.
12 weeks this year had 100 deaths or fewer for a 7 week period.
So if your total tax burden for this year is $10,000 and you already paid $9,000, your new tax bill is:
((52-40)/45)*10,000 = $2,667. Since you already paid $9,000, your final tax bill is: $2,667 - $9,000 = -6,333 or a refund of -6,333
This doesn't account (pun intended) for tax credits or tax deductions. It's just a bottom line calculation.
Guess who would benefit the most from this, by the raw dollars?
🙂
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus😬 You, Surter, and DDM seem to be stuck in an echo chamber with each other.
Lockdowns aren't helping. The data supports social distancing, and free movement of medical professionals.They also give governments way too much economic power.
While full lockdowns are being considered the last resort given the advancements in knowledge we've gathered on the virus the idea they don't help stop spreading of the disease is just not true.
You can even see the effects of the lockdown in our society. After our initial surge we started to level out after of lockdowns were initiated. In states that adhered to lockdowns more strictly than others they continued to see decreases in cases. After the lockdown were lifted we started to see rises in cases again.
You can also see this trend in other countries where they were doing well until lockdowns were removed and then cases jumped.
Like I've never seen so much just head in sand responses then I have in this thread.
Originally posted by SurturI do agree going and celebrating a Biden victory in large crowds was dangerous.
Not as dumb as going out to celebrate a Biden victory, I'm sure you agree. And the time of "well they were wearing masks" is over with. A pass will no longer be granted for mask wearing unless everyone was also social distancing.A problem is there are people(private citizens and some in positions of power in the government) who think these business owners are dumb while at the same time feeling it's okay to go out and protest or celebrate a Biden victory.
It just can't work that way. And mayors and governors cannot participate in some protests and celebrations and then turn around and pull this kind of bullshit.
It's why people are saying "f*ck it". So yep I'm celebrating the city of NYC rightfully being told to f*ck off and keep f*cking off.
That should tell you though how bad Trump was. These people literally risked their lives to celebrate this man being removed.
You're also doing that thing where you take something and try to apply it to something else that doesn't logically make sense.
Essentially you did the adult version you saw Jimmy eat dirt and didn't yell at him why are you introducing a no eating policy we all have to follow now.
It's silly and childish.
Originally posted by Newjak
😬 You, Surter, and DDM seem to be stuck in an echo chamber with each other.While full lockdowns are being considered the last resort given the advancements in knowledge we've gathered on the virus the idea they don't help stop spreading of the disease is just not true.
You can even see the effects of the lockdown in our society. After our initial surge we started to level out after of lockdowns were initiated. In states that adhered to lockdowns more strictly than others they continued to see decreases in cases. After the lockdown were lifted we started to see rises in cases again.
You can also see this trend in other countries where they were doing well until lockdowns were removed and then cases jumped.
Like I've never seen so much just head in sand responses then I have in this thread.
This is why I stick to the science instead of my personal ideas of how things should work.
The idea that lockdowns don't work isn't my personal idea or my feelings of what works. It's the science.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30208-X/fulltext
Increased mortality per million was significantly associated with higher obesity prevalence (RR=1.12; 95%CI: 1.06–1.19) and per capita gross domestic product (GDP) (RR=1.03; 95%CI: 1.00–1.06). Reduced income dispersion reduced mortality (RR=0.88; 95%CI: 0.83–0.93) and the number of critical cases (RR=0.92; 95% CI: 0.87–0.97). Rapid border closures, full lockdowns, and wide-spread testing were not associated with COVID-19 mortality per million people.
A very lengthy study, which covered multiple areas, found lockdowns reduced new infection cases by 1% (with obvious analysis weaknesses such as testing per 100K):
https://cepr.org/sites/default/files/news/CovidEconomics13.pdf
Which is contradicted by:
Most new infection cases came from people staying at home, for NY:
https://riverdalepress.com/stories/new-covid-cases-people-staying-home-coronavirus-nyc,71784
Lengthy and complicated study that found no correlation between locked down and not locked down countries:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.20078717v1.full.pdf
And, lastly, the lockdown approach likely kills more people than it saves, specifically as it applies to COVID-19 mortality because the approach is wrong, from the outset:
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3588
The best approach is still protection of the elderly. We have enough data, now, to know what the risk factors are. The best thing someone who is in a risk group is to socially distance, follow great hygiene measures, and wear an N95 if available (with strict mask wearing protocol adherence).
Originally posted by NewjakHeard on the radio while driving that Kentucky is getting hit hard by Covd-19, Governor Beshear saying an increase x5 in some counties.
Getting close to 2000 deaths a day again. Probably going to be worse after Thanksgiving because of the idiots choosing to be done.We'll probably be back in lockdown before the year is over.
Originally posted by dadudemonhttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the-scientist.com/features/counting-the-lives-saved-by-lockdownsand-lost-to-slow-action-67689/amp
This is why I stick to the science instead of my personal ideas of how things should work.The idea that lockdowns don't work isn't my personal idea or my feelings of what works. It's the science.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30208-X/fulltext
A very lengthy study, which covered multiple areas, found lockdowns reduced new infection cases by 1% (with obvious analysis weaknesses such as testing per 100K):
https://cepr.org/sites/default/files/news/CovidEconomics13.pdf
Which is contradicted by:
Most new infection cases came from people staying at home, for NY:https://riverdalepress.com/stories/new-covid-cases-people-staying-home-coronavirus-nyc,71784
Lengthy and complicated study that found no correlation between locked down and not locked down countries:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.20078717v1.full.pdfAnd, lastly, the lockdown approach likely kills more people than it saves, specifically as it applies to COVID-19 mortality because the approach is wrong, from the outset:
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3588
The best approach is still protection of the elderly. We have enough data, now, to know what the risk factors are. The best thing someone who is in a risk group is to socially distance, follow great hygiene measures, and wear an N95 if available (with strict mask wearing protocol adherence).
I don't think you actually understand science or how it works DDM. Or at worst you do and you twist it.
Originally posted by Newjak
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the-scientist.com/features/counting-the-lives-saved-by-lockdownsand-lost-to-slow-action-67689/ampI don't think you actually understand science or how it works DDM. Or at worst you do and you twist it.
I agree that you don't understand how science works even a tiny bit and are caught up in your pseudoscience echochamber because you fell for the bullshit. It's the "virtue signaling" part that ruined your critical thinking. You feel righteous and virtuous to rail against people who do not fall into an arbitrary set of behaviors that you've deemed as correct. Disregarding the science, of course.
You just got a list of research that utterly destroys the lockdown talking points including a model that predicts why lockdowns delay deaths but cause more deaths long term. And your response is "more pseudoscience."
How about a response to the research?
More actual science:
Asymptomatic positive people did not spread SARS-CoV-2:
A total of 1174 close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases were traced, and they all tested negative for the COVID-19.
And this study also found out why people seem to "get the virus again": they are not. They are finding the DNA of the virus still in the respiratory system because of how the PCR tests work.
Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no “viable virus” in positive cases detected in this study.
They also discovered that we are seeing false positives from the PCR:
Testing of antibody against SARS-CoV-2 virus was positive IgG (+) in 190 of the 300 asymptomatic cases, indicating that 63.3% (95% CI 57.6–68.8%) of asymptomatic positive cases were actually infected. The proportion of asymptomatic positive cases with both IgM (−😉 and IgG (−😉 was 36.7% (95% CI: 31.2–42.4%; n = 110), indicating the possibility of infection window or false positive results of the nucleic acid testing
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w
Great study: lot's of info that answers a few questions we've had.
Of course, this study contradicts earlier findings of viral shedding from asymptomatic people. Since "lab confirmed, real world outcomes" are a much higher quality result in research, this research would supersede prior research about viral shedding.