What's your best guess as to when trainings will resume?

JPS said:
But he seems to dye his hair and mess with his appearance more than a woman. The guy had a brown hair and white skin when he was young, now he has blonde hair and Orange skin. So much for being a man :))
Click to expand...
That would be Mr President to you basement Joe lover.
 
wc_baller said:
From this link https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2017-2018/archive.htm, the fatality rate for the flu for that same age range is ~0.05%.
Click to expand...
Ok to be fair and address this part.

.05 vs the math I responded to above. Risk wise we are in the same category. A non issue. So yes as you point out in that age group the flu is less than 0.1. At the same time with the asymptomatic for covid you are about 0.13.

Statistically as you consider your risk factor in going out and doing things, there really is little difference.

But the press and government in states imply that everyone has a much higher risk.

Overall flu over all age groups is 0.1. Covid is with asymptomatic 0.2 to 0.26 (depending on studies that show asymptomatic at 50% or 35%). Using either number the overall risk to the population is minimal.

You, I and everyone go about our daily lives without concern knowing flu overall is 0.1%. Are you telling me know that double that to 2.5 times that somehow now you are freaking out?

In my lifetime I cannot recall anyone dying from the flu. I cannot recall anyone I know telling my about someone they knew dying from the flu. Does it happen? Sure. Are there people here that will tell you, yeah my mom died. But really look at the numbers and consider the risk. For the population at large the risk is minimal as of the data we currently have.
 
Desert Hound said:
Ok to be fair and address this part.

.05 vs the math I responded to above. Risk wise we are in the same category. A non issue. So yes as you point out in that age group the flu is less than 0.1. At the same time with the asymptomatic for covid you are about 0.13.

Statistically as you consider your risk factor in going out and doing things, there really is little difference.

But the press and government in states imply that everyone has a much higher risk.

Overall flu over all age groups is 0.1. Covid is with asymptomatic 0.2 to 0.26 (depending on studies that show asymptomatic at 50% or 35%). Using either number the overall risk to the population is minimal.

You, I and everyone go about our daily lives without concern knowing flu overall is 0.1%. Are you telling me know that double that to 2.5 times that somehow now you are freaking out?

In my lifetime I cannot recall anyone dying from the flu. I cannot recall anyone I know telling my about someone they knew dying from the flu. Does it happen? Sure. Are there people here that will tell you, yeah my mom died. But really look at the numbers and consider the risk. For the population at large the risk is minimal as of the data we currently have.
Click to expand...
Where did I freak out? Just pointing out that DOUBLE(and other estimates I’ve seen indicate it’s likely higher than that) the risk is not what you earlier described as a minimal difference. Calling bullshit when I see it, and your previous post was piled high with it. No freak out here.
 
That’s the problem with non-contextual statistics. If all I report is a 6000% increase, that feels like a big deal. If you learn a risk went from .000000001 to .000006, does it seem the same? And if someone gives you one bit without the other, might that be intentionally misleading?
 
Desert Hound said:
First and foremost the covid is not anywhere close to 30 times deadlier.

If it were, the states and feds would not have allowed the recent protests to happen NOR would any states be actually opening up.

The CDC stats at the time were from April. At that point we already had 50-60K deaths. The number was large enough to determine actual percentages. Further we have other countries data to look at as well.

At this stage (June) we now have better treatment options which will start to bring the rate down lower.

You mention AZ. I believe when I posted AZ stats you were talking AZ earlier. As of today, AZ shows declining deaths despite more positive results. Go look it up. You can pull up the daily AZ stats.

You make the mistake math wise of the entire population exposed as well. Bad math mistake. During flu season as an example the entire population does not get exposed to the flu. If it did...calculate the flu mortality rate over 330 million people. You would get a far higher number vs yearly flu deaths. Look it up. And think about that math. Clearly you have not thought that through. Because if you calculate flu mortality over our ENTIRE population, the number of deaths in any given year would be DRAMATICALLY higher.
Click to expand...

Dude, I was trying to dumb it down for you. Ok, here it goes, on the Arizona statistics that you cited, please click on the link, then go to the covid deaths link, click that, and then click on the 45-54 and 55-64 age groups. What do you see? 6% and now 13% right? Yeah, I thought so. The reason I quoted that is because most of us on this board are probably in that age range.

On the flu v. covid thing, let me dumb it down for you a little further. So in a regular flu season, we don't shut down anything, we don't social distance, and we don't wear face masks. So that means the flu bug gets to go wherever it wants to and gets an equal chance to infect anybody in the entire United States. Some people get it, some don't, some get mild symptoms, and some are asymptomatic. And yet with these pristine conditions for the flu, it kills on average 30,000 - 35,000 per an entire 8 month flu season. For the 2019-2020 flu season, the CDC said there were anywhere from 24,000 to 64,000 deaths. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm With me so far.

So far, in 4 1/2 months, three of which have been on lockdown, we have 113,000 deaths. So for this season alone, right now on June 11, 2020, covid is anywhere from at least 2X to 4X deadlier than the flu. If we had not locked down, socially distanced, and worn face masks, how many deaths do you think we'd have today (6/11/20)? Be honest now. I'd say at least 250-300 K.

Remember that 1 - 2.2 million death number that was originally floating around? That was an apples to apples comparison with the flu. If we let covid roam around like the flu, for 8 months, with no lockdown, no face masks, and no social distancing, that's what you get. Let's just take the low ball figure of 1,000,000. The all time greatest number of deaths a flu season has recorded is around 100,000. I think that happened twice. So that would be at least 10X deadlier than the flu and that is being very conservative and giving you every benefit of the doubt.

As I said in another post, your obsession with the flu death rate is so that you can make the argument that these blue state governors are freaking out, taking a hammer to a mosquito, etc., etc., etc. Did you conveniently forget that there is a person in the White House whose supposed to be the Commander in Chief leading us in a war against the "invisible enemy?" Isn't HE responsible for the health and welfare of the American people? And wasn't HE the one who shut down the country on March 16th? Didn't HE leave us in a "shithole" situation with an underwhelming lack of testing and no direction.

Oh, just let the states figure it out. Unfortunately for all of us, this is a free for all. Were just going to have to wing it as best we can.
 
conservative estimates have us at 400,000 deaths by next spring. That’s with a bump for normal flu season.
That’s scary as hell.

we’ve all just accepted a certain amount of deaths is ok if we get to live how we want.

we don’t know a lot about covid. Many of us are equating what scientists don’t know with them being wrong, exaggerating or the government controlling us. But what if the unknown means this is really worth being scared over.
a lot of people are dying. And our federal leaders aren’t leading. We have no nation wide plan to mobilize testing which would be huge. Or leadership to lay out a gameplan with resources to back up a blueprint. It’s a mess.
this is pretty much an awful scenario
 
Desert Hound said:
Trump likes the poorly educated?

What are the dems offering up?
Free healthcare?
Free college?
Getting rid of college debt incurred?
Etc. etc.

Those proposals are pandering to people that don't understand math, finances and tax.

Defund the police? Lets make a change?
Who has been in charge of these big city departments? The Dems for decades on average. They have set the rules, the laws, are in charge of police oversight. And yet their constituency are led to believe that if you vote for Dems again this time, now maybe they will run the police forces better?

Lets not pretend poorly educated people reside overwhelmingly on any one side of the political spectrum.
Click to expand...
A picture is worth a thousand words... breath deep ...
And I proud to be an American at least I know I’m free.
1591931990848.png
 
Desert Hound said:
Trump likes the poorly educated?

What are the dems offering up?
Free healthcare?
Free college?
Getting rid of college debt incurred?
Etc. etc.

Those proposals are pandering to people that don't understand math, finances and tax.



Defund the police? Lets make a change?
Who has been in charge of these big city departments? The Dems for decades on average. They have set the rules, the laws, are in charge of police oversight. And yet their constituency are led to believe that if you vote for Dems again this time, now maybe they will run the police forces better?

Lets not pretend poorly educated people reside overwhelmingly on any one side of the political spectrum.
Click to expand...

Student loans:

Defunding the police sounds radical until you realize we have been defunding education for years.
 
There is a vaccine for the flu virus, and it still kills thousands of people a year. So how is Covid 19 proven to be more deadly? What would a flu season with 0 vaccinations look like? Would the deaths be more than current Covid 19 numbers? Saying that Coronavirus is more deadly than the flu is, at minimum, deceitful.
 
full90 said:
we don’t know a lot about covid. Many of us are equating what scientists don’t know with them being wrong, exaggerating or the government controlling us. But what if the unknown means this is really worth being scared over.
a lot of people are dying. And our federal leaders aren’t leading. We have no nation wide plan to mobilize testing which would be huge. Or leadership to lay out a gameplan with resources to back up a blueprint. It’s a mess.
this is pretty much an awful scenario
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily disagree entirely but I do point out this is because of our form of government. Trump you'll recall wanted to open up after 30 days. Some red states ignored him and started opening up earlier. Some blue states are still in partial lockdown. If he had the power to impose a uniform solution, you'd probably be complaining he's an idiot because he's opening up too soon and forcing California to move faster.

Within those limitations we did have a plan to mobilize testing. It basically involved taking away the government monopoly on testing (which caused the absolute disaster in the opening weeks) and privatizing a lot of it. In most areas of the country, we now have plenty of tests (and in fact there are tests just sitting there because not everyone who might be positive is getting tested). There's still some clog up on the back end (but that capacity takes a little longer to build including training people to handle the tests). It's a big country with a lot of people, and while they could have always done better, given the early misstep (which was not a Trump admin error, but a bureaucratic FDA/CDC one, though you can argue the buck should stop with him, but then can't argue we should trust the experts) we've done decently. Where we don't have a uniform policy is on tracing or if we should force people to get tested, but I don't want to go too far off topic.

Federalism is a double edged sword, it means we get to wait longer than other states for soccer to reopen, and a President couldn't order a uniform lockdown or reopen period. It also means individual areas can respond to the situation as needed on the ground. The cons found federalism inconvenient when Trump wanted to open things up and couldn't. The libs found it inconvenient when the federal govt couldn't adopt a national lockdown or test and trace policy. If we don't like it, we'd need to rewrite the US Constitution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top