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.
Translation: the left will do whatever it wants, in the name of "science", to keep this thing going as long as they see fit. If you question them, you're either a "science denier", or a right wing nut.
If you make it political.
Otherwise I'd say the left is simply more apt to believe and follow their doctors recommendations.
10 weeks ago, the stated goal of the shutdown was to flatten the curve and prevent over-crowded hospitals.
Here we are 10 weeks later and the shutdown is still going.
And there you are, very clearly calling anyone questioning the policies, as a bunch of Nazis.
Very locale dependent as we are opening here in AZ. Might be our biggest Memorial Day in some time. Hopefully with few life and health related repercussions.
Translation: the left will do whatever it wants, in the name of "science", to keep this thing going as long as they see fit. If you question them, you're either a "science denier", or a right wing nut.
Once again, it's amazing how you guys lump China, Iran, Saudi Arabia into the "Left" considering how all those countries are doing the same thing as America.
Instead of making it out to be some political disagreement between Dems and the GOP, why don't you just accept that the only people opposed to these measures are the people who want to follow Donald Trump's idiocy, regardless of where it takes them?
Not the OP here, but saw that immediately: that these were pandemic scenarios. Five different models. Not sure the OP realized it. But what they do is estimate a far lower death rate than originally thought. I further linked an NPR article that discussed the revised plans and several people of the medical field quoted in that article suspect that the politics may have enveloped the CDC now. As I said, time will tell.
But as another poster up thread mentioned, I too am interested in the death rate for people who become ill with the virus. I think that's how it needs to be measured. Just like regular influenza. The death rate shouldn't count people who have it but never become symptomatic. They wouldn't measure the flu that way.
Quote:
CDC uses a mathematical model to estimate the numbers of influenza illnesses, medical visits, hospitalizations, and deaths in the United States, (1-4) as well as, the impact of influenza vaccination on these numbers.
This is a far worse virus. With such a low death rate, we are still nearing 100,000 deaths in a short time. And you believed the CDC on the death rate, so you'll have to take their word for it on the number of deaths as well I suppose.
Still a big deal.
And I'm still in favor of opening up intelligently at this point.
So it looks like President Trump and Rush Limbaugh were right all along, while the so-called "Experts" at the WHO and the panic promoting mass media have been consistently and spectacularly wrong.
What a complete fiasco this has been.
I remember in January, the epidemiology "experts" were downplaying this virus, as nothing to be concerned about, and how it was "a very low risk to Americans," saying "it's a respiratory virus, and we know how to treat those illnesses," which was why we shouldn't worry.
I'd like to see a break down on the risk / fatality by age group. The one I saw last month had people under 30 years old with a 0.003% risk of fatality, and those under 50 years old showing the same risk as they had for the seasonal flu.
Don't get me wrong, getting the seasonal flu, or the Wu-flu is something we all need to avoid. Any one of our immune could be having an off week, and pneumonia is a lung infection which could permanently damage our lungs.
But let's be real, people 60 years and older need to take special precautions until we have a working vaccine. People over 80 need to isolate themselves from people, and cancer and AIDS patients may not even be able to safely handle taking the vaccine.
Stay healthy, practice mitigation and sanitary practices, and be safe. But people 40 years and under should not be locking themselves away in their homes, and remaining unemployed.
At this point the death rate is still between 2-3% for confirmed cases in some states. Worldometers still shows US death toll of 6%. In some countries, the death rate is over 10%.
No, it's not. Take a calculator - multiply 320,000,000 x .25% - you get 800,000. Eight million would be potential deaths if the entire population developed the disease assuming current death rates of .025, or 2.5%. We'll never see eight million. I don't think we'll even see 800,000 - as I am hopeful with continued use of masks, social distancing, and improved treatment modalities the death toll will drop - and hopefully hospitalizations can be forestalled with earlier and more effective intervention.
For those who refuse to believe reported deaths, then use excess deaths. How do you account for those? Good articles on that issue, here:
deaths are barely above 1% of confirmed cases in a few states.
You are correct that the BEST guesstimate we have right now are the "excess death" MODELS/historical data. However, scientifically, wouldn't you also need to wait an entire year? Wouldn't you need to account for other factors?
If we're going to look at it all dispassionately - and after all, isn't that what data is? - then let's do that.
If a 90 year with health issues died in April from undetected COVID and that falls in the "excess deaths", but.... that same 90 year old had a 75% chance of not living though 12/31 and would have died in November anyway ... is it a 1.0 or .25 excess death? I don't know the answer to that in the methodology.
Death aside, apparently permanent loss of taste and smell is common with this virus.
Imagine being condemned to eat only bland gruel for the rest of your life. No more enjoying a nice juicy steak, or sausages, or ice cream. Just tasteless gruel. Kill me now lol.
Believe it or not, I'm with you on that. That was when the purpose was to "flatten the curve" and make sure the hospitals were not overwhelmed.
But as another astute observer on here put it, it then kept going and going. They kept moving the goalposts. Many states took far too long to open up, and as a result there could be long lasting damage to our citizens' livelihoods.
You will note, it was mostly one political Party that lauded this approach...
it's been discussed - though consistently the actual topic gets ignored - when did we go from "flatten the curve" to "minimize cases" (at the least).
I remember in the early days those who told us of "exponential growth! DO you have any idea what that means!! A steep upwards curve. Case and death rates increasing at an ever-faster pace!"
scroll down to the graphs. Tell us which doesn't show a lowering of rates.
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.
