Jump to content

Formerly DT: COVID-19 - Featuring Lots of Politics, now CR because political talk not going away


InkaUtexas

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Continental Op said:

Based on everything I've read there is nothing stopping you from going and doing pretty much whatever the hell you want without a mask on.  Why not just do it if you want to do it?  If you know in your heart it is the right thing to do then why concern yourself with the approval of others?  I'm not being sarcastic.  If you want to do it why not just do it?

It has to be a social contract to get the value of herd immunity and avoid crushing our economy. 

If I do whatever I feel like then it makes others uncomfortable without the ancillary benefits I’d like to see for society. 

If 30% of people eat at restaurants and fly on airplanes those businesses are still dead. If 85% of people do that then they aren’t dead. 

Thanks for asking the question and engaging in a discussion. I appreciate that

Edited by Wulaw Horn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Every time I go to Kroger now it seems like $200 (go more or less once a week). 

Prepping 450 meals a month and cleaning up after that is no joke. My 9 year old has taken up baking during the pandemic. I swear sometimes I run the dish washer 3 times a day. It’s driving me crazy. 

I have an almost CTJ level of hate toward cereal. I served it to my kids the other day just because I couldn’t handle the idea of doing dishes again that day 

The struggle is real. 

At least our water is a well. Helps with 11 loads of dishes and 9 loads of laundry a week. 

"Why you filthy animal (s)"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I don’t know.  My first question would be: How many of the asymptomatic prisoners end up developing symptoms?  There’s still a lot of unknowns with this virus.

That’s a good question that we should know the answer to in what- about 14 days at the worst?  It’s awesome that we have a controlled situation of relatively young (I’d assume) people to see what happens. 

If you have 1 death, 3 hospitalizations and 20 people get a little sick (just pulling out numbers here based upon nothing) then that argues big time to me that society should quarantine the at risk population and get this over with and life back to normal. 

If you get 10 deaths, 30 people in the hospital and 80 people praying for death they get so sick with 100 unaffected that tells us something the opposite direction that we need to avoid transmitting this, damn the consequences for the economy, society etc. 

thats my takeaway, curious as to yours. 

Edited by Wulaw Horn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:
9 minutes ago, Continental Op said:

 

It has to be a social contract to get the value of herd immunity and avoid crushing our economy

This involves a literal blood sacrifice, and it’s not guaranteed to work.  Maybe let’s see how it goes in other countries attempting this.  The economy is the people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BevoSwag said:

Relaxed rules regarding hair cuts

Here are some of the rules they will have to follow:

  • One customer per stylist allowed in the establishment, unless they are waiting for service
  • Six feet of distancing between work stations
  • Appointment system encouraged
  • If allowing walk-ins, distancing required for people waiting for service
  • Customers and stylists are strongly recommended to wear masks throughout

Trying to figure out how that pesky mask will work lol.

Yeah I have no idea how you eat or get your hair cut with a mask on. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This involves a literal blood sacrifice, and it’s not guaranteed to work.  Maybe let’s see how it goes in other countries attempting this.  The economy is the people. 

Looks like it’s going ok in Sweden. I’d need to see their GDP results to really be able to say for sure. They didn’t crash their health care system. They aren’t dying at absurd rates. If their GDP is down 5 or 10 percent while ours is down 35 or 40 percent then I’d say they won and we lost. 

If their GDP is dow like ours is and they end up with 25% unemployment and don’t get herd immunity and come out of this any quicker than we do then it clearly isn’t a win for them. 

I know of very very very few things in life that benefit from prolonging the pain. Most things are best dealt with early on. That’s how I think this virus plays out. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Yes we get it. You don’t care about anyone but yourself. 

Yes because giving people's a way to gain employment is just all about him.

 https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/05/04/847841791/flood-of-calls-and-texts-to-crisis-hotlines-reflects-americans-rising-anxiety

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration saw a fivefold increase at its National Helpline between the beginning and end of March. The Crisis Text Line says its volumes are up 40% in the pandemic, to about 100,000 conversations a month.

Yep, people just love staying home with no money.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Looks like it’s going ok in Sweden. I’d need to see their GDP results to really be able to say for sure. They didn’t crash their health care system. They aren’t dying at absurd rates. If their GDP is down 5 or 10 percent while ours is down 35 or 40 percent then I’d say they won and we lost. 

If their GDP is dow like ours is and they end up with 25% unemployment and don’t get herd immunity and come out of this any quicker than we do then it clearly isn’t a win for them. 

I know of very very very few things in life that benefit from prolonging the pain. Most things are best dealt with early on. That’s how I think this virus plays out. 

If you wanted to attempt herd immunity in the United States, you’d need credible leadership to pull it off.  Otherwise, human beings are not going to die or risk death for the economy. 

  • Like 3
  • Fuck You 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:


If I weren’t celebrating Cinco De Mayo on my back porch I’d come up with something pithy in response but I’m basically lazy and slightly drunk.

Dude if you can't come up with pithy shit when you're drunk, what good are you ?

Edited by Onboard 2.0
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DDD Dad said:


If I weren’t celebrating Cinco De Mayo on my back porch I’d come up with something pithy in response but I’m basically lazy and slightly drunk.

Fajitas queso and guacamole on the back porch myself. Ran out of Pacificos so working on bourbon. Maybe you should ask bozo to help you out with lazy drive by posts. Seems to be a recent past time of his. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If you wanted to attempt herd immunity in the United States, you’d need credible leadership to pull it off.  Otherwise, human beings are not going to die or risk death for the economy. 

Without an economy human beings are going to die and risk death anyway. 

I saw you got negged and I’m sure that’s for being political about the strong leader but I think that’s unfair to you by whoever did it. That’s not a political statement in my mind against Trump necessarily but rather a statement of fact. You absolutely would need a good strong leader who laid out the reasons for everyone to understand and could convince people that going on with life as before was necessary for us to win. We don’t have such a leader anywhere at any level in this country. 

I think this country might be too big and diverse for that kind of decision, but if we were going there it would be absolutely critical to have a very strong and effective leader. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:


If I weren’t celebrating Cinco De Mayo on my back porch I’d come up with something pithy in response but I’m basically lazy and slightly drunk.

While living in Mexico I never saw any locals celebrating the Cinco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

How can y’all be paying more attention to hygiene if there isn’t any toilet paper left?

We were laughing this weekend, if we hadn't bought the 32pk at Sams right as the initial panic hit; we'd still have 10 rolls in the house from what we already had on hand.

Hell, I figured everyone knew something about all of us shitting ourselves all day with the plague or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Without an economy human beings are going to die and risk death anyway. 

I saw you got negged and I’m sure that’s for being political about the strong leader but I think that’s unfair to you by whoever did it. That’s not a political statement in my mind against Trump necessarily but rather a statement of fact. You absolutely would need a good strong leader who laid out the reasons for everyone to understand and could convince people that going on with life as before was necessary for us to win. We don’t have such a leader anywhere at any level in this country. 

I think this country might be too big and diverse for that kind of decision, but if we were going there it would be absolutely critical to have a very strong and effective leader. 

and you'd have to have accurate scientific data to make the decision.  if your scientists told you herd would kill 2.2M people and even basic mitigation would kill 500K what would you do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

and you'd have to have accurate scientific data to make the decision.  if your scientists told you herd would kill 2.2M people and even basic mitigation would kill 500K what would you do?

How long a total time period?  At what damage to economy and the fabric of society?  What are the total deaths in society?  It’s a see saw. If basic mitigation means we see saw back and forth for years and have a prolonged Great Depression my guess is the underlying misery would be greater with basic mitigation and 500k deaths but I’d need to see answers (or likelihood of answers) to that other stuff. 

End of the day I don’t think social distancing is going to be found to have a huge effect on the CFR. I think if you get it you are going to die or not die, get hospitalized or not hospitalized, or shrug it off like you didn’t even know you had it regardless of if you get sick in March of 2020 or October of 2021. Maybe the CFR goes down a little bit of the stein weakens over time, but your main goal for social distancing is to keep total number of infections down. 

Theres a limit to how much damage we can do to the economy and how long people will deal with the social distancing, so I can’t say I’m in favor of any of what we are doing. 

Thats my supposition and guess about this thing. I don’t think anyone could possibly grasp and know any one part of the equation and I don’t feel like we are hearing from anything beyond “how to avoid getting this” when I think that might be impossible, and counterproductive to society. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

How long a total time period?  At what damage to economy and the fabric of society?  What are the total deaths in society?  It’s a see saw. If basic mitigation means we see saw back and forth for years and have a prolonged Great Depression my guess is the underlying misery would be greater with basic mitigation and 500k deaths but I’d need to see answers (or likelihood of answers) to that other stuff. 

End of the day I don’t think social distancing is going to be found to have a huge effect on the CFR. I think if you get it you are going to die or not die, get hospitalized or not hospitalized, or shrug it off like you didn’t even know you had it regardless of if you get sick in March of 2020 or October of 2021. Maybe the CFR goes down a little bit of the stein weakens over time, but your main goal for social distancing is to keep total number of infections down. 

Theres a limit to how much damage we can do to the economy and how long people will deal with the social distancing, so I can’t say I’m in favor of any of what we are doing. 

Thats my supposition and guess about this thing. I don’t think anyone could possibly grasp and know any one part of the equation and I don’t feel like we are hearing from anything beyond “how to avoid getting this” when I think that might be impossible, and counterproductive to society. 

in a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Need to vent. I responded to a silly covid truther meme and got a silly response. 
 

meme had week old numbers but the gist was nyc has 11,000 covid deaths and Tokyo has 60, then a rhetorical question saying could it be because nyc gets money for every covid death and why is the covid death rate 250x higher in nyc than Tokyo?

i went ahead and took the bait, replied with current covid cases and deaths for ny state and Tokyo, and the respective death rates from those numbers (6 and 3), and throw in something about the assumed average health of a tokyoite vs a New Yorker. 

The response I get back is I need to look closer, because the death rate is per capita.

as if all the people that haven’t yet gotten it get to count in the denominator.
 

and he’s serious. AND he’s had lung cancer twice so you’d think he would take this a little seriously. AND he’s a big time prepper who should be happy that he has a reason to hunker down. 
but nope, it’s all a government conspiracy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another study to point to genetics.  I would really like to see more down here.  If we could determine genetically who is at risk for more serious cases, that would be huge.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/your-genes-could-determine-whether-coronavirus-puts-you-in-the-hospital-and-were-starting-to-unravel-which-ones-matter-2020-05-05?siteid=yhoof2&yptr=yahoo

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

and you'd have to have accurate scientific data to make the decision.  if your scientists told you herd would kill 2.2M people and even basic mitigation would kill 500K what would you do?

Well, you could also actually try reading the report and looking at the combined suppression and mitigation strategies it discussed. In particular, the Imperial College of London report discussed enacting suppression measures when cases reached a certain threshold then stopping them until cases again reached that threshold (i.e., rolling shutdowns). For the UK those methods were predicted to take them from 550,000 deaths to between 12,000 and 48,000 depending on the implementation (gee, that initial estimate looks absolutely "horrible" as the UK sits right in the middle of that range) . They didn't provide US numbers for those strategies, but said the results were "qualitatively similar." So I guess that means between 48,000 and 192,000 deaths.  But, that would be too hard for you because you didn't like the conclusion of the report (or rather didn't understand it) and therefore think it is "bad science." (here is a hint, you don't identify bad science by starting at the conclusion)

Quote

 

Suppression strategies for GB. Impact of three different policy option (case isolation + home quarantine + social distancing, school/university closure + case isolation + social distancing, and all four interventions) on the total number of deaths seen in a 2-year period (left panel) and peak demand for ICU beds (centre panel). Social distancing and school/university closure are triggered at a national level when weekly numbers of new COVID-19 cases diagnosed in ICUs exceed the thresholds listed under “On trigger” and are suspended when weekly ICU cases drop to 25% of that trigger value. Other policies are assumed to start in late March and remain in place. The right panel shows the proportion of time after policy start that social distancing is in place. Peak GB ICU surge capacity is approximately 5000 beds. Results are qualitatively similar for the US.

* * *

To avoid a rebound in transmission, these policies will need to be maintained until large stocks of vaccine are available to immunise the population – which could be 18 months or more. Adaptive hospital surveillance-based triggers for switching on and off population-wide social distancing and school closure offer greater robustness to uncertainty than fixed duration interventions and can be adapted for regional use (e.g. at the state level in the US). Given local epidemics are not perfectly synchronised, local policies are also more efficient and can achieve comparable levels of suppression to national policies while being in force for a slightly smaller proportion of the time

* * *

The measures used to achieve suppression might also evolve over time. As case numbers fall, it becomes more feasible to adopt intensive testing, contact tracing and quarantine measures akin to the strategies being employed in South Korea today. Technology – such as mobile phone apps that track an individual’s interactions with other people in society – might allow such a policy to be more effective and scalable if the associated privacy concerns can be overcome. 

 

 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Well, you could also actually try reading the report and looking at the combined suppression and mitigation strategies it discussed. In particular, the Imperial College of London report discussed enacting suppression measures when cases reached a certain threshold then stopping them until cases again reached that threshold (i.e., rolling shutdowns). For the UK those methods were predicted to take them from 550,000 deaths to between 12,000 and 48,000 depending on the implementation (gee, that initial estimate looks absolutely "horrible" as the UK sits right in the middle of that range) . They didn't provide US numbers for those strategies, but said the results were "qualitatively similar." So I guess that means between 48,000 and 192,000 deaths.  But, that would be too hard for you because you didn't like the conclusion of the report (or rather didn't understand it) and therefore think it is "bad science."

 

you could understand the the definition of going for herd immunity is changing nothing which is 2.2M deaths per the report.  I understand the report perfectly. what you don't understand is the rule breaker's report was wild estimation bullshit guessing.  The UK was never going to have 550K dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gmr548 said:

The northeast is second only to the west in terms of health. Still America though.
It's crazy to think of chili's or applebees or whatever as a cool neighborhood place. Whereas we've seen torchys, chuys, hopdoddy, etc. explode nationally and I still kind of think of them as local (though chuys just kind of sucks regardless). So it goes I guess.

Was the Snuffers right there too?

Damn I loved hitting that place for a burger, loaded fries and mushrooms 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...