Jump to content

akhornfan

Full Members
  • Posts

    246
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by akhornfan

  1. There’s no saving you if you’re going to believe what you read. All that is a reporting of deaths divided by cases. Yes the calculation is correct but all analysis and projection based on that figure is bullshit.
  2. I have only been arguing against the alarmist math. Making potential claims in the face of pretty simple numbers. I’ve never mentioned Ebola. And my belief that the current numbers do not support extreme measures in the US
  3. Yes. All the ‘math’ at 2.7% to 5%+ CFR and 20% hospitalization. Was happening yesterday.
  4. They would not do what they did if it was just starting today. But it’s full CYA now. It’s done so might as well make it look like a brilliant decision.
  5. Less than 24 hours ago you were doing the stupid 2.7% math so don’t act like you weren’t pushing that agenda
  6. And now make the claim that you’re heartless if you’re willing to accept that there may well be a few thousand deaths domestically, but you can’t shut down life over that.
  7. You keep pushing the ‘this is a disaster’ angle despite the growing evidence to the contrary. So call your shot here. . . what do you think is going to happen?
  8. The number from Korea is a hard figure(doesn’t mean it’s accurate as a predictor, but it is a real calculation). Actual deaths divided by confirmed cases. It is more likely a ceiling than a floor. It does not count anybody that didn’t test but may have been infected with very mild symptoms. Signs point to the Korea number decreasing not increasing
  9. And that number is just an estimate. There’s no broad testing for that either. The point is, that it’s a relatively insignificant t number versus what it would take to change it. And that’s what they’re saying now without saying it. There’s no point in large scale testing because we already know the number. And the number is low enough to just encourage hygiene. Not high enough to start closing shit down
  10. I think they’re using risk in a pretty broad way. More like the risk of real negative outcomes than the risk of infection. I don’t think they’re just counting on vaccines or warm weather, but also weighing risk/reward of containment measures. But that’s something they can’t just say, but behind closed doors you know that the conversation is essentially ‘what economic impact vs how many deaths’.
  11. We’re never going to know the CFR because they’re not going to test everyone. Just going to end up with a disputed estimate.
  12. Mowing down/picking them off one by one is one of the dumber things I’ve read.
  13. The CFR is less. We know that the denominator in the factor is understated and by a significant amount. What I keep repeating, is what’s the purpose of saying it IS 2.7% and that’s a big deal IF millions are infected, when you know that it’s just not 2.7%?
  14. Except that we essentially know that that’s not the CFR so the IF is wrong. That’s something resembling the CFR on serious cases. The IF now is should we be focusing on containment or mitigation and what impact is worth what’s going to be a relatively low, but well publicized death count.
  15. And King County is pretty much admitting that it’s everywhere
  16. 1918 isn’t comparable just because you use the word comparable
  17. I think we keep extrapolating infection as if it hasn’t already happened. Like, in the case of the WA senior care facility, ‘two people have already died, just wait until the rest of them get it’. When more realistically, they already were exposed and two died. It may get another one or two, but it’s not going to kill half of them. We’re more likely seeing things retrospect than in the early stages.
  18. I don’t think it’s tinfoil and conspiracies. The common flu is expected to infect and kill a certain predictable number each year. You can make the predictions and extrapolations because there’s a ton of data. Where we sit now is just at a question of what data is relevant and how to make assumptions. I’ve been arguing that we have higher certainties about some numbers - China being garbage, S Korea at least identifying a lot of cases, Italy being behind the curve at testing and the rest pretty insignificant data points. Is there really anyone still believing this takes down 1M or even half that in 2020? Would love to see a show of hands.
  19. If you’re counting how many should be tested the US number is probably in the millions. I’m saying S Korea has, at least according to them, tested the most people. It’s doubtful they’re lying about deaths or hospitalization, so the CFR and hospitalization rates are somewhere at or below their figures.
  20. I just think that’s probably the only country so far that has anywhere near a grasp on their case count. So CFR and hospitalization guesses should be built closer to their numbers.
  21. There’s a distinct pattern developing: omg someone dies test them and declare your first case oops they infected others increase case count few other critical die increase death count start widespread testing death and hospitalization don’t keep up with case count restart focus on next omg first case
×
×
  • Create New...