Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's a little bit from UofA prof Gerard as quoted in ABC15 on 5/5:
"This is not going away soon; it’s something that we're going to need to be continued to be worried about because our risk of catching this virus still remains relatively high."
But the same guy said he can't predict the future AZCentral 4/4:
And, Gerald cautions, his model can't predict the future.
The model does a "very poor job of predicting the future."
We expect the pols to play politics. I hope the professor isn't as well.
Do you disagree with him? I mean, it seems a bit obvious to me when you look at the U.S. trajectory that we have probably not reached our peak IF we all head back out into the work force where social distancing takes an obvious secondary role behind going out and creating wealth for others.
I'm not so sure he's the one playing politics here.
Vitamin D seems to help fight the virus. So go stop watching that crap on Netflix and go outside now!
You are right about that. Turns out DHS lab testing shows sunlight kills the virus. And if it's one thing AZ has plenty of, it's sunshine. Finally got it confirmed after weeks of speculating and a whole lot of misinformation. Of course, this does not mean leaving your house and going to the nearest mall.
Do you disagree with him? I mean, it seems a bit obvious to me when you look at the U.S. trajectory that we have probably not reached our peak IF we all head back out into the work force where social distancing takes an obvious secondary role behind going out and creating wealth for others.
I'm not so sure he's the one playing politics here.
I was pointing out that in one month the professor went from being pretty adamant about not being able to predict the future to trying to do just that.
The other issue I have with him is his use of the Imperial College sensationalist predictions.
On top of that, according to his bio: "As a health services researcher with expertise in cost-effectiveness analysis, he is well-suited to evaluate the economic impact of health interventions," his efforts in his area of expertise would be much more useful than yet another model.
As for your creating wealth for others comment I'm all ears.
I was pointing out that in one month the professor went from being pretty adamant about not being able to predict the future to trying to do just that.
The other issue I have with him is his use of the Imperial College sensationalist predictions.
On top of that, according to his bio: "As a health services researcher with expertise in cost-effectiveness analysis, he is well-suited to evaluate the economic impact of health interventions," his efforts in his area of expertise would be much more useful than yet another model.
As for your creating wealth for others comment I'm all ears.
I don't mean to ask this rhetorically, but have your opinions remained static in the past 30 days? We have 30 more days of data to analyze, so I don't think it's as offensive for him to allow that data to inform his present-day opinion. You didn't say whether you thought he was wrong, which is probably because he's not wrong. This thing isn't going away nor does FEMA think so -- quite the contrary, they're predicting a 7x increase in the amount of daily increase in one month. If that comes to fruition, you can believe that a lot more people will update their outlook on things.
Three letters: UBI. If we peer into the future, UBI exists for a whole host of reasons. We're already OK with using tax dollars to help the ultra wealthy leave legacies for their descendents, why don't we attempt a trickle-up path to economic success by giving increased purchasing power to those who will almost immediately place it back into the economy? By doing so, you're also giving people the freedom to return to work as they see fit, and not based on completely arbitrary P&L objectives. This is the essence of putting people into danger for the sole sake of creating wealth for others.
These are ideas you might not agree with today, but I won't judge you for them if you think better of them in 30 days, 30 months, or 30 years. In the end, they're inevitable, it's just a matter of when we want to come to terms with them. Hopefully it's not one of those issues where we have to wait for powers-that-be to die off before we can be forward-thinking.
Doesn't say that at all, pretty worthless article.
It's still totally undetermined at this time. Not enough sweeping tests using a large percentage of the population. We also need reliable antibody testing that can determine if asymptomatic people have enough protection not to get re-infected. There's no evidence either way on this.
Also, if the virus mutates, you absolutely would be able to get infected again.
Worthless article=doesn't support my theory on the Coronavirus.
"Researchers at the South Korean centre for disease control and prevention (CDC) now say it is impossible for the COVID-19 virus to reactivate in human bodies" is pretty important since the WHO keeps warning against immunity passports.
I don't mean to ask this rhetorically, but have your opinions remained static in the past 30 days? We have 30 more days of data to analyze, so I don't think it's as offensive for him to allow that data to inform his present-day opinion. You didn't say whether you thought he was wrong, which is probably because he's not wrong. This thing isn't going away nor does FEMA think so -- quite the contrary, they're predicting a 7x increase in the amount of daily increase in one month. If that comes to fruition, you can believe that a lot more people will update their outlook on things.
Three letters: UBI. If we peer into the future, UBI exists for a whole host of reasons. We're already OK with using tax dollars to help the ultra wealthy leave legacies for their descendents, why don't we attempt a trickle-up path to economic success by giving increased purchasing power to those who will almost immediately place it back into the economy? By doing so, you're also giving people the freedom to return to work as they see fit, and not based on completely arbitrary P&L objectives. This is the essence of putting people into danger for the sole sake of creating wealth for others.
These are ideas you might not agree with today, but I won't judge you for them if you think better of them in 30 days, 30 months, or 30 years. In the end, they're inevitable, it's just a matter of when we want to come to terms with them. Hopefully it's not one of those issues where we have to wait for powers-that-be to die off before we can be forward-thinking.
My opinions can and will change. However, I am not publishing a weekly model for consumption claiming to have any better insight than the next guy. This guy is redundant and we all might be better served if he does what his bio claims he's good at.
Wrong about infections? Maybe, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. Now, if he wants to stand up with how many WILL die. Then I will guess that he will be wrong just like every other model.
The FEMA model is garbage. It's another one of those "if we do nothing, here's what happens." Which is ok for FEMA because they're planners for disasters, but it's not realistic and it's not meant for us to be acted upon but for them to prepare for because that's their job.
UBI?
Nice to see though that unlike others here, you at least have the guts to declare that a pandemic is an excellent opportunity to implement the progressive agenda. But again, you make no mention of how it will be paid for.
Worthless article=doesn't support my theory on the Coronavirus.
"Researchers at the South Korean centre for disease control and prevention (CDC) now say it is impossible for the COVID-19 virus to reactivate in human bodies" is pretty important since the WHO keeps warning against immunity passports.
No, you're not at all understanding your own article.
It says that the virus cannot reactivate. A dead virus cannot come back to life. It doesn't at all speak to immunity of a virus that is mutating. The headline is misleading, but if you actually read and understand the article, you'll see that it doesn't at all prove what you seem to think that it does.
UBI?
Nice to see though that unlike others here, you at least have the guts to declare that a pandemic is an excellent opportunity to implement the progressive agenda. But again, you make no mention of how it will be paid for.
Thanks, I guess. But do keep in mind that if waiting for a disaster is good enough for our federal government (and they took no time at all to hand out fat checks to fat cats), then I don't feel guilty about it either.
Burning Madolf/llowllevellowll 2020.
People with potentially opposing views can always sit down and find commonalities. We could absolutely do a complete break down of the budget. I'm certain there are items in our budget that we could both agree on cutting or cutting out completely in favor of one that will promote a fresh economic stimulus. Our creation of a debtor society has limits and I think we are nearing those limits. Why not work on the future of economic policy before a revolution? Afterall, it worked for FDR and for the Republicans. His implementation of social safety nets (that others said we couldn't afford) was in direct response to threats of a far left worker rebellion and communist sympathizers agreed to take the bait. Since those bill passages, our government has spent a lot of time and resources ensuring that those safety nets would effectively be repealed. And many of them have been. All I want to see is for worker's to attain the same rights they had prior to WWII. Even that would be pretty disheartening to look forward to "progressive" policies that can be found 80 years in the past.
Sadly, we're all tricked into this idea that we cannot afford the things that would make life better for basically everyone except for the outrageously wealthy while we pony up the cash for the very bold and expensive things that their lobbyists deem necessary. Don't believe it for a second.
Worthless article=doesn't support my theory on the Coronavirus.
"Researchers at the South Korean centre for disease control and prevention (CDC) now say it is impossible for the COVID-19 virus to reactivate in human bodies" is pretty important since the WHO keeps warning against immunity passports.
I'm not a WHO fan. Still, you put words in their mouth. They said here https://www.who.int/news-room/commen...xt-of-covid-19
"WHO has published guidance on adjusting public health and social measures for the next phase of the COVID-19 response.1 Some governments have suggested that the detection of antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, could serve as the basis for an “immunity passport” or “risk-free certificate” that would enable individuals to travel or to return to work assuming that they are protected against re-infection. There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.
Currently: dated April 24th. 6 days ago (AFTER April 24th WHO post) was the article that you posted. It's a website and maybe it's not updated. And so we are clear, WHO warned about it because South Korea noticed anomalies (later it turned out to be testing issues). Therefore, no need to toss WHO under the bus to fit your narrative. I propose it's just timing. Not a conspiracy nor lying. Now if they continue to repeat their approach in the future announcements, then you might be onto something.
Thanks, I guess. But do keep in mind that if waiting for a disaster is good enough for our federal government (and they took no time at all to hand out fat checks to fat cats), then I don't feel guilty about it either.
Burning Madolf/llowllevellowll 2020.
People with potentially opposing views can always sit down and find commonalities. We could absolutely do a complete break down of the budget. I'm certain there are items in our budget that we could both agree on cutting or cutting out completely in favor of one that will promote a fresh economic stimulus. Our creation of a debtor society has limits and I think we are nearing those limits. Why not work on the future of economic policy before a revolution? Afterall, it worked for FDR and for the Republicans. His implementation of social safety nets (that others said we couldn't afford) was in direct response to threats of a far left worker rebellion and communist sympathizers agreed to take the bait. Since those bill passages, our government has spent a lot of time and resources ensuring that those safety nets would effectively be repealed. And many of them have been. All I want to see is for worker's to attain the same rights they had prior to WWII. Even that would be pretty disheartening to look forward to "progressive" policies that can be found 80 years in the past.
Sadly, we're all tricked into this idea that we cannot afford the things that would make life better for basically everyone except for the outrageously wealthy while we pony up the cash for the very bold and expensive things that their lobbyists deem necessary. Don't believe it for a second.
You are right there is always good common ground to find. That's why I'm more of a believer, now more than ever, in local participation in the political process. Watch your local budget discussions to see what should some of the greatest political/budget gymnastics ever performed as every source of tax incomes dries up completely. And then hold on to your wallet.
I do think the people and governments at every level should start to learn to live within their means and not spend and pretend to be able to do the same things as those with liquid assets.
We can point to FDR for having created the great safety net while simultaneously pointing out that they've overshot their original intentions and that sometimes even people with good ideas make equally bad decisions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Finally got it confirmed after weeks of speculating and a whole lot of misinformation. Of course, this does not mean leaving your house and going to the nearest mall. 
