Bad News Thread

Says the man who throws around statistics terms, but can’t write a decent explanation of what he means by them.

Do you have a coherent explanation of whatever your point was with R^2 yet?

Should be easy for you. I’m just asking your to clearly explain your own point, in your own words.

Ask him about percentages.
 
Had we followed your advice last March, what would have happened?

Case growth followed an exponential curve up until about a week after the shutdowns began. (From Feb 01 to March 24 or March 29, 2020). This part is just fact. Look at a log scale graph of case counts.

Back then, you wanted us to believe it was not exponential. Had we followed your advice, case growth would have continued on an exponential path until something else slowed it down. What would that have been, and when would it have happened?

If you are relying on widespread natural immunity to act as the brakes, the slowdown doesn’t really start until you are over 50% seroprevalence. How many deaths would you have had up to that point?

You can estimate it. IFR back then was 0.7%. Our treatments were not very good yet. So, 330M * 0.5 * 0.07 = 1.15M deaths. That is a kind estimate, since it assumes absolutely no degradation in the heath care system. Once you account for that, you get the 2.2 million Imperial College estimate.

Which brings us back to the original point. Those initial restrictions saved us between 0.5 million and 1.5 million deaths, depending on your assumptions about what happens when you run out of health care facilities.
Cherry Pickers Delight.
 
Just to be clear, I had no clue what was happening in March. My only advice at that time was don't panic, don't overreact.

All I knew was what I read on my laptop. I could see the public reactions before March - sudden shortage of facemasks (any kind or price) followed by TP and PT. Then, (I'm sure there is a good reason, I just don't know it), no redwood lumber.

I have tried to stay out of this debate except when someone is promoting falsehoods or scientific impossibilities.
 
All I knew was what I read on my laptop. I could see the public reactions before March - sudden shortage of facemasks (any kind or price) followed by TP and PT. Then, (I'm sure there is a good reason, I just don't know it), no redwood lumber.

I have tried to stay out of this debate except when someone is promoting falsehoods or scientific impossibilities.
Try harder
 
No divisions on that one. Both sides agree that higher vaccination rates make it possible to open more things.

The remaining question is how quickly, and in what order.

My preference was "slowly, kids first". The country chose "quickly, adults first.".

It's why the strip clubs were open before the playgrounds. Not sure who wants to take credit for that decision.
 
It's why the strip clubs h open before the playgrounds. Not sure who wants to take credit for that decision.
That was a judge's decision, not a policy decision re: strip clubs. (Technically they won on a freedom of expression claim, which apparently only applied to dancing naked, and not dancing clothed)

I'm sure if the playground coalition had enough money to hire counsel they would have prevailed. I think every group that brought an action against the state or a county won their case, including Let Them Play. Of course they brought most of the cases in San Diego and not the Bay Area.
 
No divisions on that one. Both sides agree that higher vaccination rates make it possible to open more things.

The remaining question is how quickly, and in what order.

My preference was "slowly, kids first". The country chose "quickly, adults first.".
None of the above would be an issue if the experts didn't ignore the well established Science. Instead they employed the wrong test (PCR) to identify real time infections. Fauci should go to jail for his fraud.
 
Says the man who throws around statistics terms, but can’t write a decent explanation of what he means by them.

Do you have a coherent explanation of whatever your point was with R^2 yet?

Should be easy for you. I’m just asking your to clearly explain your own point, in your own words.
Don’t hold your breath
 
Melbourne is entering now it’s 3rd lockdown due to 25 cases. The lockdowns in australia are very severe and include stupid stuff like outdoor mask mandates and shutting down schools and being able to leAve your house only for certain limited reasons. The second lockdown at over 100 days was one of the longest in the world.
 
Dad4 made a comment a number of pages back to the effect that "Courts are how we hold people accountable". This mentality is why California is such a litigious state. I personally believe courts are the venue of last resort for holding people accountable. Nevertheless, Newsom has been held accountable for his unlawful Covid restrictions time and time again. Here is the latest:


This wasn't just a loss for Newsom, when you have to pay the other sides attorneys' fees, that's an ass kicking. (and this considering churches were a known source of spread in some cases.) Just add to it the court overruled restrictions on restaurants, strip clubs, youth sports etc.

Whether Dad4's proposed restrictions for Covid, which as best I can tell sounds like Newsom restrictions on steroids, would work, or not, is a moot point since many of Newsom's restrictions were deemed unlawful.

(On a macro level an appellate court deemed Newsom had power under the Emergency Act to amend state law or policy, but on a case-by-case basis those restrictions that were challenged were nearly all determined to be unlawful by the Court.)
 
My brother in law says seat belts, helmets when riding a bike, stop signs and speed limits are all unnecessary as well. FREEDUMB!
I suspect that if he ever gets t-boned on his bike he'll likely change his mind. (Not encouraging this to happen, just an observation).
 
Melbourne is entering now it’s 3rd lockdown due to 25 cases. The lockdowns in australia are very severe and include stupid stuff like outdoor mask mandates and shutting down schools and being able to leAve your house only for certain limited reasons. The second lockdown at over 100 days was one of the longest in the world.
The more severe restrictions are a way to reduce the duration of the restrictions.

The idea is to reduce R well below 1. If R = 0.9, you will eventually get to zero, but it might take a long time. If you can get to R = 0.7, it takes about 1/3 the time.

They aren’t trying for sustained R<1. Think of it as R = 0.5 on a temporary basis. That requires much stricter measures than basic containment, and is therefore not a very good way to measure the difficulty of reaching R<1.

-Buzz
 
Back
Top