You CAN judge the MAGAts by their lack of cover

[St. Phatty]

so if "X" is the # of people that become "official cases"

how many people have been exposed, developed antibodies, most of them were OK, they either died or recovered but did NOT become "official cases" - what is THAT number ?

sounds like they are finding 4 to 10 times more people have been exposed, when they do the random public testing.

but i'm not sure what that number is. 4 X ? 10 X ?

 

[gaiusmarius]

A lower mortality rate x A high contagion rate is still just as deadly.

wow, so 3.2 % chance of dieing and a 0.3% chance of dieing are equally deadly is that right? ok.

 

[Douglas.Curtis]

wow, so 3.2 % chance of dieing and a 0.3% chance of dieing are equally deadly is that right? ok.

edited out some lame comment I wrote while half asleep. My apologies.

 

[gaiusmarius]

Rough numbers show a .3% chance of dying, with 11x the transmission rate of a 3.2% deathrate virus, will result in about the same number of deaths. (Edit: Forgot to ask what the transmission rate differences are to guesstimate with.)

huh? we are not talking about something 11x more transmissable, we are talking about the previously esstimated mortality rate compared to recent 0.3 mortality of the same virus. which one would you want it to be if you get sick i wonder?

 

[h.h.]

wow, so 3.2 % chance of dieing and a 0.3% chance of dieing are equally deadly is that right? ok.

Here in the U.S. there’s roughly an 80,000 out of 348 million chance of being dead.

That doesn’t change if a hundred thousand have the virus or if a hundred million have it.

If it’s only a a 0.3% chance and the rate of contagiousness is 10 times as great, that’s 0.3% of 1,000 people rather than 0.3% of 100. Big difference.

 

[White Beard]

so if "X" is the # of people that become "official cases"

how many people have been exposed, developed antibodies, most of them were OK, they either died or recovered but did NOT become "official cases" - what is THAT number ?

sounds like they are finding 4 to 10 times more people have been exposed, when they do the random public testing.

but i'm not sure what that number is. 4 X ? 10 X ?

We may NEVER know the answer to your question, because we aren’t testing EVERYBODY *NOW*. Without comprehensive numbers, we’re flying blind, and looking for conspiracies in a patchy and haphazard approach to ignore the situation and push blame off onto others is guaranteed to manufacture ‘hits’, but they will ALL lead AWAY from this administration.

Simply, we can’t break down the numbers IF WE DON’T HAVE THEM...and we *don’t* have them: it’s a situation tailor-made for generating conspiracy theories.

wow, so 3.2 % chance of dieing and a 0.3% chance of dieing are equally deadly is that right? ok.

How do businesses survive when they offer big discounts?
They make it up IN VOLUME: and that’s almost certainly at play here.

You suggest I or others simply parrot the media; I suggest you grasp numbers out of the air, strip them of context, and shake them into a line of ‘reasoning’ without attempting to understand or analyze the numbers - and then criticize others for not coming up with *your* numbers on their own. In responding to you on this, I have gone to some pains to share the things that shape my conclusions; you make it clear that you WANT to see things the way you do. That’s fine, but there can’t be a serious conversation about that without questioning your own assumptions.

You may assume I parrot the media. I can assure you all I want of the opposite, but let’s not bother with that: YOU believe what YOU hear & wonder why others don’t. Link to the data you’re using: step us through it, as I have stepped through similar things, and *demonstrate* your points by showing how your preferred data gives a better, more accurate picture of the global situation; build an argument for your data, using YOUR DATA, please. NO hand-waving, please.

You’re a highly intelligent guy, step us through it - help us see what YOU see in it: if you’re going to have a position on the matter, support it with facts and context and rational argument - not by wondering what’s wrong with people who see it differently.

As always, you may not be able to show us what you see: humans generally need a meaningful reason to stop looking at things the way they do, and see things the way you do. It happens, for sure...but you *can* try. A great place to start would be to show us what you find so compelling about the data you - and they - have presented. Maybe even a link to the study you refer to, the one with the numbers you like.

No disrespect intended toward you, Switzerland, or your seven presidents. Thank you, as always, for engaging.

 

[gaiusmarius]

We may NEVER know the answer to your question, because we aren’t testing EVERYBODY *NOW*. Without comprehensive numbers, we’re flying blind, and looking for conspiracies in a patchy and haphazard approach to ignore the situation and push blame off onto others is guaranteed to manufacture ‘hits’, but they will ALL lead AWAY from this administration.

Simply, we can’t break down the numbers IF WE DON’T HAVE THEM...and we *don’t* have them: it’s a situation tailor-made for generating conspiracy theories.



How do businesses survive when they offer big discounts?
They make it up IN VOLUME: and that’s almost certainly at play here.

You suggest I or others simply parrot the media; I suggest you grasp numbers out of the air, strip them of context, and shake them into a line of ‘reasoning’ without attempting to understand or analyze the numbers - and then criticize others for not coming up with *your* numbers on their own. In responding to you on this, I have gone to some pains to share the things that shape my conclusions; you make it clear that you WANT to see things the way you do. That’s fine, but there can’t be a serious conversation about that without questioning your own assumptions.

You may assume I parrot the media. I can assure you all I want of the opposite, but let’s not bother with that: YOU believe what YOU hear & wonder why others don’t. Link to the data you’re using: step us through it, as I have stepped through similar things, and *demonstrate* your points by showing how your preferred data gives a better, more accurate picture of the global situation; build an argument for your data, using YOUR DATA, please. NO hand-waving, please.

You’re a highly intelligent guy, step us through it - help us see what YOU see in it: if you’re going to have a position on the matter, support it with facts and context and rational argument - not by wondering what’s wrong with people who see it differently.

As always, you may not be able to show us what you see: humans generally need a meaningful reason to stop looking at things the way they do, and see things the way you do. It happens, for sure...but you *can* try. A great place to start would be to show us what you find so compelling about the data you - and they - have presented. Maybe even a link to the study you refer to, the one with the numbers you like.

No disrespect intended toward you, Switzerland, or your seven presidents. Thank you, as always, for engaging.

i am not highly inteligent, just average. not trying to say listen to me i'm highly inteligent, lmao. but i like to think i have a certain ability with logical thinking. logic told me early on that nearly everyone was lieing about this. reporters were sensetionalizing it for clicks, either for, or against Trump, (basically). then you had a bunch of doctors and nurses again either saying it was the armagedeon in their hospitals or claiming the places were empty. even politicians were falling prey to polarized versions of what is going on. even places like the WHO seemed to have some secondary mission not to hurt Chinas feelings, allowing themselves to be lied to by the Chinese about the severity and transmisability. then we have the various youtube videos and articles with the alternative therories on events.

so yeah, at a certain point i decided to abrogate my responsiblity to research this thing myself any further and only treat my reading on the subject as an interesting excercize while in real life i'm following our governmental recomendations, which btw got losened even further today, and they announced further losening to come. apparently numbers were not effected negativly by the 2 weeks of open garden centers, hairdresser, and hoby centers and massage therapy.

so yeah i admit it, im being a bit of a sheep at the moment. just as long as i feel they are doing their best to consider the over all situation, which i do right now. ill follow the recomendations and trust that their advisors have the best reliable information. but for sure it could turn out they are wrong about something, we will see as time goes on. we are only really out of the woods if there is no new surge in autumn.

 

[gaiusmarius]

maybe you can google corona virus press conferences by Swiss government and use a google translation app. to be honest i saw many videos about studies, but the one i took seriously was refered to by the virus advisor by the name of Koch. but i didnt see the actually study. another thing that kinda gave me some confidence about the serology was when the NY governour refered to one such study and came up at that time with the 0.6 number. i figured he has no reason to help trump, so if he did it's because its what he found.

 

[h.h.]

Listening to the spin off while blaming the media for reporting the news.

 

[gaiusmarius]

Listening to the spin off while blaming the media for reporting the news.

its not news when you take a picture of an empty shelf in 1 shop and tell people that shelves are empty in shops, all while the shelves are fully stocked or getting restocked after the run they caused with their sensationalized reporting.

but what ever, not interested in playing a game of ridiculing eachother with you. so you win, im a moron who listens to fox to make my life choices. hope you feel better now.

 

[h.h.]

its not news when you take a picture of an empty shelf in 1 shop and tell people that shelves are empty in shops, all while the shelves are fully stocked or getting restocked after the run they caused with their sensationalized reporting.

but what ever, not interested in playing a game of ridiculing eachother with you. so you win, im a moron who listens to fox to make my life choices. hope you feel better now.

Never called you a moron. You act respectable. I’m not here to ridicule you. If I thought that way, I would just block you. I’m tired of the dumbshits. I don’t consider you one.

I actually saw empty shelves. Folks on Facebook looking for tp. Check the government websites and read the numbers. The nurses and doctors appear to be real people, but can’t say for sure.

 

[St. Phatty]

We may NEVER know the answer to your question, because we aren’t testing EVERYBODY *NOW*.

the random tests that are truly random are Good Enough, we don't need perfect.

e.g. one of the many tests I read about, the coordinators solicited on Facebook and there was a general hunch that the people getting the test were people who wanted tests. that's not random.

i would think if they knew what the multiplier is, official cases x some # TBD, they would be telling us.

US is making Manila Prisons look organized.

 

[armedoldhippy]

US is making Manila Prisons look organized.

the US is great at making shithole countries look good. upper management, you know...

 

[gaiusmarius]

the US is great at making shithole countries look good. upper management, you know...

ok but where would you rather get sick ? manila or the US?

 

[armedoldhippy]

ok but where would you rather get sick ? manila or the US?

sorry, i thought we were comparing jails & governments. did not see health care there anyplace. i'd go with the good folks at the Vanderbilt medical in Nashville...or Duke, maybe.