Jump to content
IronChef

NCAA Championship bubble

Recommended Posts

On 9/7/2020 at 2:20 PM, dman115 said:

Total deaths from "Covid" 184K not 200k.  National hospital bed occupancies: Total beds 63% (Covid and Non-Covid); Inpatient beds for Covid 8%; ICU beds 61% (Covid and Non-Covid).  Source - CDC.gov  https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/covid19/report-patient-impact.html#anchor_1587406852

So who is completely ignorant??  And still waiting for you to answer my questions, or should I just expect the same weak attempt at a personal attack such as I am Trump supporter...again, who is completely ignorant??

I didn't say every hospital in the nation was swamped. You just LOVE answering allegations that weren't leveled, don't you? I realize you don't believe anything that doesn't proceed from Donald Trump's mouth, but here are articles that address what I said about hospitals being overrun. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/texas-starr-county-hospital-forced-choose-who-sent-home-die-2020-7

https://www.vox.com/2020/7/15/21317776/covid-19-coronavirus-florida-arizona-texas-california-hospitals

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/surge-in-virus-hospitalizations-strains-hospitals-in-several-states/2020/07/08/12855e5e-c135-11ea-864a-0dd31b9d6917_story.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, TobusRex said:

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/515453-sturgis-motorcycle-rally-was-superspreading-event-that-cost-public

excerpt: 

Based on the increase in case count, the researchers group, estimated that cases connected to the gathering resulted in $12 billion in public health costs, not including the costs associated with any deaths that might be tied to cases from the event. That dollar amount is based on another estimation that an average of $46,000 is spent on each patient who tests positive for COVID 19. Researchers concluded that more than 266,000 cases were tied to the event attended by more than 460,000 individuals.

 

And it ain't over yet. Those people will pass it along to other, and so on. But it gets better. Trump KNEW how virulent CV19 was, he knew how deadly it was. But oh...don't want the Stock Market to go down! Best to force the workers back to making wickets so the rich guys can keep getting rich. It's the little guys producing stuff at risk, after all, not the billionaires moving stock around. As I said last week: this is the TRUMP virus now, not the "China-Wuhan" virus. 

 

LOL that study is a joke.

http://ftp.iza.org/dp13670.pdf

Looking at the conclusion (page 30), it is basically claiming that any increase in cases in counties with at least a “moderate inflow” was due to the rally which is unlikely.

Further, the $46k is not “public health care costs.”  That is from a different study (http://ftp.iza.org/dp13632.pdf), using some metric called “value of statistical life,” whatever the hell that means.  It estimates even asymptomatic cases at $11k, and non-hospitalized cases at $33k...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

LOL that study is a joke.

http://ftp.iza.org/dp13670.pdf

Looking at the conclusion (page 30), it is basically claiming that any increase in cases in counties with at least a “moderate inflow” was due to the rally which is unlikely.

Further, the $46k is not “public health care costs.”  That is from a different study (http://ftp.iza.org/dp13632.pdf), using some metric called “value of statistical life,” whatever the hell that means.  It estimates even asymptomatic cases at $11k, and non-hospitalized cases at $33k...

Unlikely based on what evidence? "Gut feeling"? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, TobusRex said:

Unlikely based on what evidence? "Gut feeling"? 

Common sense?

For one, how about the fact that there have only been 300 cases linked to it?  I’m sure the number is higher, but not 1,000x higher.

It’s also hard to tell if they were factoring whether or not cases had already been increasing.

According to the study (page 25), “the highest inflow counties saw a 10.7% increase in cases.”  “The second highest inflow counties experienced about a 12.5% increase.”   So counties that had lower inflow saw a higher % increase, but Sturgis was the sole cause?  Yeah, I’d say that’s unlikely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2020 at 11:04 AM, 1032004 said:

LOL that study is a joke.

http://ftp.iza.org/dp13670.pdf

Looking at the conclusion (page 30), it is basically claiming that any increase in cases in counties with at least a “moderate inflow” was due to the rally which is unlikely.

Further, the $46k is not “public health care costs.”  That is from a different study (http://ftp.iza.org/dp13632.pdf), using some metric called “value of statistical life,” whatever the hell that means.  It estimates even asymptomatic cases at $11k, and non-hospitalized cases at $33k...

There is a phrase for that.

Torture the numbers until they speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chiefs had 17,000 fans at their game last night.  I guess if any of them get COVID, it must've been from the Sturgis rally.

 

Although on the plus side, how about the fact that the Chiefs had 17,000 people at their game!    That's gotta be the first pro event in America with more than a few fans right?   Maybe we can get some fans in US Bank Stadium for NCAA's after all...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

The Chiefs had 17,000 fans at their game last night.  I guess if any of them get COVID, it must've been from the Sturgis rally.

 

Although on the plus side, how about the fact that the Chiefs had 17,000 people at their game!    That's gotta be the first pro event in America with more than a few fans right?   Maybe we can get some fans in US Bank Stadium for NCAA's after all...

Maybe, though right now Minnesota is saying no fans through September. So far only 5 NFL teams are allowing spectators for the opening game: Cleveland, Indy, Jacksonville, KC, and Miami. Dallas is undecided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Maybe, though right now Minnesota is saying no fans through September. So far only 5 NFL teams are allowing spectators for the opening game: Cleveland, Indy, Jacksonville, KC, and Miami. Dallas is undecided.

NCAA's in Jacksonville or Miami it is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2020 at 2:16 PM, 1032004 said:

Common sense?

For one, how about the fact that there have only been 300 cases linked to it?  I’m sure the number is higher, but not 1,000x higher.

It’s also hard to tell if they were factoring whether or not cases had already been increasing.

According to the study (page 25), “the highest inflow counties saw a 10.7% increase in cases.”  “The second highest inflow counties experienced about a 12.5% increase.”   So counties that had lower inflow saw a higher % increase, but Sturgis was the sole cause?  Yeah, I’d say that’s unlikely.

You do understand that there are sophisticated models that predict things like expected infections based on the number of initial infections (say, in a given county) and the typical infection rate in that location?  So given the 300 cases, these models can predict how many ultimate cases are likely to have occurred.  Do you think these folks just pull numbers out of their collective asses?

As for inflow vs. increases:  you do understand that the level of inflow is independent of the number of cases *prior to the inflow*, don't you?  That is, if in county A there are 100 initial cases and the inflow count is 20 (Sturgis attendees), and the  case load increases to 111, then you have a 11% increase in cases.  If in county B there are 50 initial cases and the inflow count is 15, and the case load increases by the same rate (to, say, 61), you have a 12% increase in cases.  So, county A had the larger inflow *and* the smaller *percentage* increase in cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Thanks for replying with a link. The article has issues with the number stated by the article I quoted earlier, but it does say the following as well:

In a paper posted Friday, the Johns Hopkins researchers say the data collected by the San Diego center's economists (who represent three different universities) in fact support one main thrust of the study — that the Sturgis event led to a spike in COVID-19 cases in the county that hosted the rally as well as in surrounding areas.

"The case data show relatively stable trends prior to the event and clear changes around the event, with little reason to believe that the changes in cases could have been caused by anything but the event," the Johns Hopkins researchers write. "The overall conclusions that the Sturgis event caused a large increase in COVID-19 cases and infections are likely to be relatively robust to the specific statistical methodologies used."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 1032004 said:

The Chiefs had 17,000 fans at their game last night.  I guess if any of them get COVID, it must've been from the Sturgis rally.

That is an obtuse statement, and I'm surprised you made it.

Edited by TobusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TobusRex said:

Thanks for replying with a link. The article has issues with the number stated by the article I quoted earlier, but it does say the following as well:

In a paper posted Friday, the Johns Hopkins researchers say the data collected by the San Diego center's economists (who represent three different universities) in fact support one main thrust of the study — that the Sturgis event led to a spike in COVID-19 cases in the county that hosted the rally as well as in surrounding areas.

"The case data show relatively stable trends prior to the event and clear changes around the event, with little reason to believe that the changes in cases could have been caused by anything but the event," the Johns Hopkins researchers write. "The overall conclusions that the Sturgis event caused a large increase in COVID-19 cases and infections are likely to be relatively robust to the specific statistical methodologies used."

Yeah I’ll give you the surrounding area, that’s believable.

But while it was a high “per capita” rate, even the entire state of SD has only had about 7,000 new cases since before the rally started through 9/11 (over a month). And by the way the 7 day trend of new cases in the state is already coming back down.  But I’m sure schools and colleges opening within that same timeframe had nothing to do with those increases...

Another criticism of that study, this time from the American Institute of Economic Research - https://www.aier.org/article/the-sturgis-bike-rally-sensationalist-reporting-and-broken-disease-models/

Once again, I agree that the event shouldn’t have happened.  But even if those numbers were anywhere near close, if these people were traveling from various states and not wearing masks, they were probably not taking many precautions to begin with so there’s probably a good chance they would have just caught it somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, klehner said:

You do understand that there are sophisticated models that predict things like expected infections based on the number of initial infections (say, in a given county) and the typical infection rate in that location?  So given the 300 cases, these models can predict how many ultimate cases are likely to have occurred.  Do you think these folks just pull numbers out of their collective asses?

As for inflow vs. increases:  you do understand that the level of inflow is independent of the number of cases *prior to the inflow*, don't you?  That is, if in county A there are 100 initial cases and the inflow count is 20 (Sturgis attendees), and the  case load increases to 111, then you have a 11% increase in cases.  If in county B there are 50 initial cases and the inflow count is 15, and the case load increases by the same rate (to, say, 61), you have a 12% increase in cases.  So, county A had the larger inflow *and* the smaller *percentage* increase in cases.

I mean I’m pretty good at math, but not that good, so no I don’t really understand their models.  Although it does seem plenty of people that do understand them have essentially said these numbers were pulled out of their asses.

But fair enough, I don’t think I realized “inflow” was based on absolute numbers.

If that’s the case, that might make their conclusions even worse.

Some of the highest inflow counties include:

Clark County Nevada: ~75% of the total population of Nevada, yet daily new cases in Nevada have been on a pretty steady decline since the beginning of August.

Mohave/Maricopa Counties in AZ: combined about ~65% of the total population in Arizona, yet daily new cases in Arizona have been on a pretty steady decline since mid-July.

They were supposedly factoring the prior rates of daily new cases in these numbers right?  Doesn’t seem like it based on these data points.

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll note Dr Jha used the term "I doubt", not "definitely didn't". He isn't speaking from a position of absolute certainty, and it shows in his tweet. For the record I find the # of infections resulting from the Sturgis article I linked to be pretty high but I'm not an epidemiologist and the guys with "PhD" after their names tend to be more knowledgeable in medical matters than myself. Plus since the testing rate is so low in the USA I could see how we are vastly underestimating the numbers of infections in the USA. Maybe those Sturgis infection numbers quoted above are LOWER than they actually are in reality, for all I know.

What isn't in doubt though is that Trump spilled the beans to Bob Woodward, on tape, that he KNEW Covid 19 was deadly and highly virulent and yet he STILL encourages his simpleton followers NOT to wear masks at his rallies. It's the Trump supporters keeping this thing going in the USA through their colossal ignorance, credulousness, and stupidity. 

Edited by TobusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2020 at 10:45 AM, Lurker said:

Update...he is still on the ventilator and as of latest report from the hospital, we are looking at weeks until he will be able to get off the thing.  We are discussing possibility of having to do a tracheotomy in the next couple of days.   He developed a secondary infection in his lungs a few days ago, kidneys are starting to break down.  He is still fighting but he is in a real battle.  I text him every morning and evening, sometimes in between,  but have not heard from him in 12 days.  Knowing he is in there totally isolated while fighting for his life is the most gut wrenching experience of my life.

 I only am keeping this going to maintain attention to this evil freaking thing,  In hopes that people will really think before making decisions.  A couple of comments I often hear from people who believe in a lesser severity of this thing is 1) "I mean does anyone even know anybody who has really gotten sick from it?"  and 2) that since it only effects the elderly.  I'll just say that this man, while older and having those vulnerable conditions, was still very much alive.  Still helping people, still being productive, and doing it safely.  I don't know what he was doing when he got it.  I have it narrowed down to a couple days he had to get infected but I don't know where. And now, IF he does survive this thing, his life will never again be like it was three weeks ago.  

It's not a zero sum game.  We don't have to decide between locking ourselves in, or going about life as if it were nothing.  We can still go out and live life with safety precautions in mind.  If not for the sake of your health (I have never had any fear of ME getting the virus), but for the sake of your or a friends loved one. Like I  said above at the end of the day none of us know exactly anything about this thing.  We can go one of two ways and we have a chance of being wrong either way.  Which way would you rather be wrong?  I guarandamntee you there is no way you want to be wrong in a manner in which a loved one ends up like this.

Things have taken a turn in the right direction and if all goes to plan, they will extubate tomorrow and hope he can hold without going to a tracheotomy.  Still in a big battle but these have been the best set of three days by far in the past month.  This thing is just ****ing pure evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Things have taken a turn in the right direction and if all goes to plan, they will extubate tomorrow and hope he can hold without going to a tracheotomy.  Still in a big battle but these have been the best set of three days by far in the past month.  This thing is just ****ing pure evil.

I don't think a lot of people realize how insidious COVID 19 is, as you say. What appalls me most are the people STILL claiming it's a hoax and not real, the morons running around without masks as if they are "tough guy patriots" and not the "ignorant morons" they truly are. Personally I don't give a **** about myself. I've lived plenty long and won't be sad to leave this ****hole Earth. I worry about the people I love, my very elderly parents (89 and 90 years old), my elder sister (69 years old) and my twin sister (55 years old). I worry about THEM. I get angry when I see the stupid **** Trump and his supporters say/do while this pandemic is going on and how they are continuing to spread it without regard to human lives, putting my loved ones at risk.

Edited by TobusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TobusRex said:

I don't think a lot of people realizes how insidious COVID 19 is, as you say. What appalls me most are the people STILL claiming it's a hoax and not real, the morons running around without masks as if they are "tough guy patriots" and not the "ignorant morons" they truly are. Personally I don't give a **** about myself. I've lived plenty long and won't be sad to leave this ****hole Earth. I worry about the people I love, my very elderly parents (89 and 90 years old), my elder sister (69 years old) and my twin sister (55 years old). I worry about THEM. I get angry when I see the stupid **** Trump and his supporters say/do while this pandemic is going on and how they are continuing to spread it without regard to human lives, putting my loved ones at risk.

I wont get into the politics and misinformation of it.  But will say a couple things:  Do give a **** about yourself.  Before my dad made this trip up north (plan was for a month), every decision i made with my wife, kids, and family was based on protecting him.  Doesn't mean we stayed locked up, I was just cautious about what we were doing and how we were doing it. He listened and stayed safe.  And dad even himself said at one point, "sometimes I just feel like why mess with all the fuss, I'm 73 years old, if its my time its my time."  I'm willing to bet when he left, the precautions I had been tormenting him with stayed here, and he got it within a week.  And trust me when I tell you he know realizes it wasnt his time, and has a new look.....if he makes it out of this thing.   Additionally, my brother who lives up there eventually was the one taking him to the hospital, in his car.  They both wore masks while my Dad was inebriated with and shedding the virus.  My brother did not get it.  Yes that's just one case, but......

It is true that this will have this kind of impact mostly on the older and vulnerable.  What's sad is that people use that as an excuse to just ignore the damn thing.  As if those fathers,  mothers, husbands, wives, grandparents, don't really matter that much.  What's also sad is the mindset that those people actually feel like the vulnerable should stay locked in, pay more for all basic home needs because they would have to be delivered, not spend time with their families....because they are being selfish by wanting to come out so I have to wear a mask when I go grocery shopping.  Literally their mind set is me not wearing my mask is protecting my freedom, but you not staying locked in and wanting to continue to live your last remaining years is selfish. This pandemic has truly brought out the worst in "we the people", and its a very sad thing to see for America.  I've said for a long time we can blame the officials and the media all we want, but at the end of the day we make decisions, and those individual decisions, as a collective, determine how this pandemic goes from here on out, more so than any official or media outlet.  

On top of which, this isn't just about how many people die and how many people survive it.  They are already to seeing complications even in young people, and the long term complications, while still hypothesis, are nightmare hypothesis.  I've already started making my dad's house wheel chair accessible and making plans for the very close care he is going to need if he makes it home.  This is a man who, while he did have those underlying conditions, was very active in projects, boating, etc.  Life will never be the same for him again.  And there are thousands upon thousands who are going to be looking at a similar road.  Every single person has a part in how this goes in our country, the difference is going to be how they approach that part. 

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...