Jump to content

akhornfan

Full Members
  • Posts

    246
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by akhornfan

  1. Or possibly, the threat is really, really low. I think it’s foolish to not at least consider that possibility.
  2. China is just going to close the book on this thing, claim victory and stop testing. I doubt we’d ever know if it flared up again there unless it became catastrophic.
  3. I am having a hard time imaging the panic that’s going to ensue if/when large scale testing begins.
  4. There was also the guy that said his son’s girlfriend was in the know about the cases in Katy.
  5. I have been arguing against current CFR being used as projected CFR and that has been my main point. When I said ‘believe everything you read’ someone had posted a screenshot of a google search showing a bunch of links to a 2.3% or 2.7% CFR. Using that to attempt to project the future is foolish and I pointed that out. Doing so didn’t include any critical thinking.
  6. You’re incredibly paranoid. I think the numbers are going to be below what you do and you can’t handle that? If you look back over the last few days the board consensus seemed to hover near 3% CFR and I was showing how I thought they was too high. Now I’m seeing a bunch of people saying it’ll be 1%. I think the S Korea numbers will turn out to be close. I still don’t see any other country claiming to do testing on the scale that they do. It’s also been in that country for a long time comparatively and the death figures just aren’t piling up.
  7. Yep. At whatever bar on burnside for basketball I don’t remember the name of the place for football, but east side out the 84 at 90th or so. Long time ago.
  8. I think the WHO report out of China had some small number of young kids cases, but no deaths. Certainly no one that young outside of China though
  9. Meh. I stand corrected on posting here. Thought I had. But yes. You’re right. I created the same user name I’ve had for 20 years since hornfans and super early on this site in a plan to troll a coronavirus thread. Long game.
  10. That is not a fact. Didn’t post in the last few weeks or something sure.
  11. I think we should be testing and don’t understand why we’re not. I don’t hate all of my family. i don’t think we need to be doing massive quarantines.
  12. Whatever. I’ve been around forever. I just rarely post. None of what I’m saying it troll. Feel free to disagree. @triplehorn you may remember me from Portland like 10 years ago.
  13. And I think in general my position is being misunderstood. I have an opinion that the ending outcome of this will not fall in the ‘bad’ realm. I’m basing that opinion on light research and following the situation and it’s for sure affected by intuition world view as well. I certainly accept I may be wrong. Brisket did some back of the napkin math, ended up with some large numbers, which he clarified with an ‘if’, but then ended his post with a pretty emphatic statement that thing will be ‘bad’. I’m asking him if he strongly believes a number in those death ranges or is just taking some dramatic license? typing at the same time. Your post above answered my question. Thanks for the clarity.
  14. They’re still just guesses. Picking a series of them that leads to 1M deaths is presenting a worse case scenario.
  15. It’s back there a few pages yes - I was specifically asking why he was choosing to be so emphatic about a ‘bad scenario’ instead of choosing to follow the ifs from the previous paragraph.
  16. I’m not arguing your definition of ‘bad’. I’m asking why you’re saying it WILL be bad after throwing out a bunch of ifs and worse case figures. Do you really think there will be 500,000 deaths? Or pick another large number. . .
  17. The link was a few pages back. https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN20Q2G6 I’m saying that the quick calculation I did off of Brisket’s post is just as ‘valid’ I believe the lower numbers will be more accurate. But that’s a belief and a guess. He said it ‘will be bad’ - stronger statement
  18. WHO said today that it spreads less efficiently than the flu. So I can just as easily say that half the people will be affected and that the CFR is 3 times and an average of 30,000 deaths so it’s somewhere around 45,000 deaths and if we weren’t talking about it no one would notice. My assumptions are no better or worse than yours. Yet you end by saying that it ‘will be plenty bad’. What leads you to make that claim?
  19. I’m making my guess. Feel free to make your own. it’s very easy to say what could happen. I’m not arguing that, but it doesn’t look to me like enough people will get infected and enough of those leading to cause the sort of catastrophic scenarios being thrown out there
  20. That there won’t be enough cases to overwhelm the health care infrastructure and it’s not deadly enough.
  21. Wasn’t directed at you. I think it’s Reuter’s making the comparison. WHO is being more vague. At least from the quote in the article.
  22. So dumb. See my previous comment about believing what your read instead of thinking. Those figures are apples and oranges and they should be called out for making a comparison.
  23. You’re hung up on one stupid comment about Ebola. Let that one go. There has been a lot of chatter about what ifs around the 2%+ CFR and 20% hospitalization. The actual figure for both of those is very important as it drives the answer to ‘what do we do now?’ No one cares about the relative comparison to the Ebola CFR.
×
×
  • Create New...