Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

A place to share your views and make your case on any issues fit to discuss.

Moderators: kmax, SonomaCat, rtb

Post Reply
bobcat99
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3746
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by bobcat99 » Tue May 26, 2020 7:17 pm

TomCat88 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 6:54 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 6:29 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
There is a difference between thinking it's a hoax, and thinking it may not be as bad as previously thought.

When you see things like Washington having people who died from gun shot sounds on their Covid deaths list, it raises questions about all the other deaths. Dying with Covid does not equal dying from Covid. In addition, I saw today that all of the people in rest homes and assisted living total about 0.6% of the population, but have accounted for 42-43% of the Covid deaths. A lot of that is thanks to Cuomo and Co. Had the proper precautions been taken, deaths are severely lowered in that sector.

I believe if you're 54 and under, your chances of dying from Covid are 0.046%. Pretty low.

So, is it a hoax? No. Are people overreacting? I think so.

I don’t know for sure why the death rate this year has been much higher than normal, but my guess is it’s Covid-19
. I’m sure there have been deaths assigned to Covid that shouldn’t have been, but I’m also sure that more deaths have been caused by Covid and assigned to something else. If not, then there’s another disease going around or there’s an anomaly unlike any in the history of the country.
Did I state otherwise Tom?



ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4477
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by ilovethecats » Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm

seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!



91catAlum
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7064
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: Clancy, MT

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by 91catAlum » Tue May 26, 2020 8:06 pm

Its actually 0.3% fatality rate in the US when you factor in the asymptomatic people:

"The CDC's New 'Best Estimate' Implies a COVID-19 Infection Fatality Rate Below 0.3%"
https://reason.com/2020/05/24/the-cdcs- ... below-0-3/


Image
24-17
31-23
29-25
48-14

TomCat88
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 14000
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:16 am
Location: An endless run of moguls

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by TomCat88 » Tue May 26, 2020 8:55 pm

bobcat99 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:17 pm
TomCat88 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 6:54 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 6:29 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
There is a difference between thinking it's a hoax, and thinking it may not be as bad as previously thought.

When you see things like Washington having people who died from gun shot sounds on their Covid deaths list, it raises questions about all the other deaths. Dying with Covid does not equal dying from Covid. In addition, I saw today that all of the people in rest homes and assisted living total about 0.6% of the population, but have accounted for 42-43% of the Covid deaths. A lot of that is thanks to Cuomo and Co. Had the proper precautions been taken, deaths are severely lowered in that sector.

I believe if you're 54 and under, your chances of dying from Covid are 0.046%. Pretty low.

So, is it a hoax? No. Are people overreacting? I think so.

I don’t know for sure why the death rate this year has been much higher than normal, but my guess is it’s Covid-19
. I’m sure there have been deaths assigned to Covid that shouldn’t have been, but I’m also sure that more deaths have been caused by Covid and assigned to something else. If not, then there’s another disease going around or there’s an anomaly unlike any in the history of the country.
Did I state otherwise Tom?
I was responding to what you said that I put in bold. There’s a lot of talk about improperly recorded deaths and that the death count is overstated. If that’s true, then there’s either another disease going around or we’re just coincidentally having way more deaths than usual.


MSU - 14 team National Champions (most recent 2011); 52 individual National Champions (most recent 2017).
toM StUber

MSU01
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4175
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:21 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by MSU01 » Tue May 26, 2020 8:56 pm

ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
The CDC has some really interesting projections available - I'm guessing this is where you got your 0.4% death rate estimate from as their most recent "best estimate". Their confidence interval of possible death rates in their five scenarios runs from 0.2% on the low end to 1% on the high end, so there's still quite a bit of uncertainty at this time about what the true death rate actually is (the death rates of 0.8 - 0.9% assumed by the early models you call asinine are still inside the CDC's confidence interval, by the way).

I think that as you say, it's important to look at the data from an impartial standpoint and not try to cherry-pick certain numbers to score political points - this can easily be done by people at both ends of the political spectrum since there are so many ways of looking at the available data.

The problem I see with your argument is that today, we have orders of magnitude more data available to look at than we did back in March when the decisions to implement stay-at-home orders and business closures were originally put in place. If we knew in March what the data now shows in May, would things have been a little different? Likely so! But we have to look at the decisions that were made from a viewpoint of what the data showed at that time, which was much more limited and even the CDC at the time was predicting a higher death rate than they are now. I don't think reasonable people ever looked at the original models with 100% certainty they were correct - the problem, on the other hand, was that there was so much uncertainty at the time that the saying of "hope for the best, but plan for the worst" was pretty much all we had to go on to inform the decision making process.

What is 100% certain is that the mitigation measures that were put in place DID substantially lower the number of cases, and DID substantially lower the number of deaths. No, we don't know exactly what the numbers would have been without those measures. It's incredibly difficult to debate the relative importance of human lives vs damage to the economy, largely because we don't have the full picture yet of how this pandemic will play out over the next months and years. I think most people would agree though that there needs to be a balance between the two, although individuals will inevitably disagree on exactly where the fulcrum point of the see-saw with the economy on one side and public health on the other side should be located.

What we can do is ask ourselves if the data we have now justifies the decisions that are being made now. I'd say the answer is a resounding yes as states begin the process of reopening.


Go Bobcats! 24-17 31-23 29-25 48-14

bobcat99
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3746
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:11 am

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by bobcat99 » Tue May 26, 2020 9:37 pm

TomCat88 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 8:55 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:17 pm
TomCat88 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 6:54 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 6:29 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
There is a difference between thinking it's a hoax, and thinking it may not be as bad as previously thought.

When you see things like Washington having people who died from gun shot sounds on their Covid deaths list, it raises questions about all the other deaths. Dying with Covid does not equal dying from Covid. In addition, I saw today that all of the people in rest homes and assisted living total about 0.6% of the population, but have accounted for 42-43% of the Covid deaths. A lot of that is thanks to Cuomo and Co. Had the proper precautions been taken, deaths are severely lowered in that sector.

I believe if you're 54 and under, your chances of dying from Covid are 0.046%. Pretty low.

So, is it a hoax? No. Are people overreacting? I think so.

I don’t know for sure why the death rate this year has been much higher than normal, but my guess is it’s Covid-19
. I’m sure there have been deaths assigned to Covid that shouldn’t have been, but I’m also sure that more deaths have been caused by Covid and assigned to something else. If not, then there’s another disease going around or there’s an anomaly unlike any in the history of the country.
Did I state otherwise Tom?
I was responding to what you said that I put in bold. There’s a lot of talk about improperly recorded deaths and that the death count is overstated. If that’s true, then there’s either another disease going around or we’re just coincidentally having way more deaths than usual.
I think it's obvious there are improperly recorded deaths. My example, for one.

It's also obvious that Covid is killing people, almost half of whom were in senior living/assisted living homes. Interesting note there, in New York, if you got Covid in a senior living home, but died in a hospital, you are not counted among the deaths in senior living homes.

Anyways, Tom. It can be factually accurate that Covid deaths can me misrepresented, and also factually accurate that there are deaths caused by Covid that have resulted in an increase in normal deaths. They are not mutually exclusive.



TomCat88
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 14000
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:16 am
Location: An endless run of moguls

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by TomCat88 » Tue May 26, 2020 11:15 pm

bobcat99 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 9:37 pm
TomCat88 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 8:55 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:17 pm
TomCat88 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 6:54 pm
bobcat99 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 6:29 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
There is a difference between thinking it's a hoax, and thinking it may not be as bad as previously thought.

When you see things like Washington having people who died from gun shot sounds on their Covid deaths list, it raises questions about all the other deaths. Dying with Covid does not equal dying from Covid. In addition, I saw today that all of the people in rest homes and assisted living total about 0.6% of the population, but have accounted for 42-43% of the Covid deaths. A lot of that is thanks to Cuomo and Co. Had the proper precautions been taken, deaths are severely lowered in that sector.

I believe if you're 54 and under, your chances of dying from Covid are 0.046%. Pretty low.

So, is it a hoax? No. Are people overreacting? I think so.

I don’t know for sure why the death rate this year has been much higher than normal, but my guess is it’s Covid-19
. I’m sure there have been deaths assigned to Covid that shouldn’t have been, but I’m also sure that more deaths have been caused by Covid and assigned to something else. If not, then there’s another disease going around or there’s an anomaly unlike any in the history of the country.
Did I state otherwise Tom?
I was responding to what you said that I put in bold. There’s a lot of talk about improperly recorded deaths and that the death count is overstated. If that’s true, then there’s either another disease going around or we’re just coincidentally having way more deaths than usual.
I think it's obvious there are improperly recorded deaths. My example, for one.

It's also obvious that Covid is killing people, almost half of whom were in senior living/assisted living homes. Interesting note there, in New York, if you got Covid in a senior living home, but died in a hospital, you are not counted among the deaths in senior living homes.

Anyways, Tom. It can be factually accurate that Covid deaths can me misrepresented, and also factually accurate that there are deaths caused by Covid that have resulted in an increase in normal deaths. They are not mutually exclusive.
That’s essentially what I said.

Will you be joining me in telling people it’s highly unlikely that, while it’s been shown that some Covid deaths were actually caused by something else, there is mass over counting of deaths due to Covid?


MSU - 14 team National Champions (most recent 2011); 52 individual National Champions (most recent 2017).
toM StUber

onceacat
1st Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1723
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 11:35 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by onceacat » Tue May 26, 2020 11:28 pm

MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 8:56 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
The CDC has some really interesting projections available - I'm guessing this is where you got your 0.4% death rate estimate from as their most recent "best estimate". Their confidence interval of possible death rates in their five scenarios runs from 0.2% on the low end to 1% on the high end, so there's still quite a bit of uncertainty at this time about what the true death rate actually is (the death rates of 0.8 - 0.9% assumed by the early models you call asinine are still inside the CDC's confidence interval, by the way).

I think that as you say, it's important to look at the data from an impartial standpoint and not try to cherry-pick certain numbers to score political points - this can easily be done by people at both ends of the political spectrum since there are so many ways of looking at the available data.

The problem I see with your argument is that today, we have orders of magnitude more data available to look at than we did back in March when the decisions to implement stay-at-home orders and business closures were originally put in place. If we knew in March what the data now shows in May, would things have been a little different? Likely so! But we have to look at the decisions that were made from a viewpoint of what the data showed at that time, which was much more limited and even the CDC at the time was predicting a higher death rate than they are now. I don't think reasonable people ever looked at the original models with 100% certainty they were correct - the problem, on the other hand, was that there was so much uncertainty at the time that the saying of "hope for the best, but plan for the worst" was pretty much all we had to go on to inform the decision making process.

What is 100% certain is that the mitigation measures that were put in place DID substantially lower the number of cases, and DID substantially lower the number of deaths. No, we don't know exactly what the numbers would have been without those measures. It's incredibly difficult to debate the relative importance of human lives vs damage to the economy, largely because we don't have the full picture yet of how this pandemic will play out over the next months and years. I think most people would agree though that there needs to be a balance between the two, although individuals will inevitably disagree on exactly where the fulcrum point of the see-saw with the economy on one side and public health on the other side should be located.

What we can do is ask ourselves if the data we have now justifies the decisions that are being made now. I'd say the answer is a resounding yes as states begin the process of reopening.
Thats an awfully reasonable statement at this point. I'd throw in one caveat regarding the CDC's assumption of Infection Fatality Rate: Since none of the antibody tests have gone through the normal testing process, its impossible to know how many false positives are being counted in the overall infection rate.

If its true that 18,000,0000 people have had the virus and not been tested, then you can get close to the .4% Infection Fatality Rate. And, quite frankly, if there are 18,000,000 people currently carrying an disease with a .4% fatality rate, that should scare us into locking down and never coming out again, because it means that 10,000,000 of us are going to die before this is all said and done, and its well beyond our control to do anything other than hunker down.

If airplanes had a 1% chance of dying, nobody would ever fly. Heck, if "only" .4% of airplanes crashed, nobody would ever fly.

Given the false



GoldstoneCat
2nd Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1042
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:27 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by GoldstoneCat » Wed May 27, 2020 5:26 am

ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
Most people aren't dying, you're correct. People that aren't dying, however, are getting very sick in some, not all, cases. People report being sicker than they've ever been. Healthy people in their 40s developing clots that are causing large-vessel strokes. Absent that, many are bedridden for multiple weeks. Now, are those issues reason enough for the measures we saw taken? Perhaps not. But just because healthy working people aren't dying in huge numbers doesn't mean it's not making them very sick in many cases, and also doesn't mean it's not something to fear/respect/pay damn close attention to.



GoldstoneCat
2nd Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1042
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:27 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by GoldstoneCat » Wed May 27, 2020 5:34 am

onceacat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 11:28 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 8:56 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
The CDC has some really interesting projections available - I'm guessing this is where you got your 0.4% death rate estimate from as their most recent "best estimate". Their confidence interval of possible death rates in their five scenarios runs from 0.2% on the low end to 1% on the high end, so there's still quite a bit of uncertainty at this time about what the true death rate actually is (the death rates of 0.8 - 0.9% assumed by the early models you call asinine are still inside the CDC's confidence interval, by the way).

I think that as you say, it's important to look at the data from an impartial standpoint and not try to cherry-pick certain numbers to score political points - this can easily be done by people at both ends of the political spectrum since there are so many ways of looking at the available data.

The problem I see with your argument is that today, we have orders of magnitude more data available to look at than we did back in March when the decisions to implement stay-at-home orders and business closures were originally put in place. If we knew in March what the data now shows in May, would things have been a little different? Likely so! But we have to look at the decisions that were made from a viewpoint of what the data showed at that time, which was much more limited and even the CDC at the time was predicting a higher death rate than they are now. I don't think reasonable people ever looked at the original models with 100% certainty they were correct - the problem, on the other hand, was that there was so much uncertainty at the time that the saying of "hope for the best, but plan for the worst" was pretty much all we had to go on to inform the decision making process.

What is 100% certain is that the mitigation measures that were put in place DID substantially lower the number of cases, and DID substantially lower the number of deaths. No, we don't know exactly what the numbers would have been without those measures. It's incredibly difficult to debate the relative importance of human lives vs damage to the economy, largely because we don't have the full picture yet of how this pandemic will play out over the next months and years. I think most people would agree though that there needs to be a balance between the two, although individuals will inevitably disagree on exactly where the fulcrum point of the see-saw with the economy on one side and public health on the other side should be located.

What we can do is ask ourselves if the data we have now justifies the decisions that are being made now. I'd say the answer is a resounding yes as states begin the process of reopening.
Thats an awfully reasonable statement at this point. I'd throw in one caveat regarding the CDC's assumption of Infection Fatality Rate: Since none of the antibody tests have gone through the normal testing process, its impossible to know how many false positives are being counted in the overall infection rate.

If its true that 18,000,0000 people have had the virus and not been tested, then you can get close to the .4% Infection Fatality Rate. And, quite frankly, if there are 18,000,000 people currently carrying an disease with a .4% fatality rate, that should scare us into locking down and never coming out again, because it means that 10,000,000 of us are going to die before this is all said and done, and its well beyond our control to do anything other than hunker down.

If airplanes had a 1% chance of dying, nobody would ever fly. Heck, if "only" .4% of airplanes crashed, nobody would ever fly.

Given the false
I agree with both of you. In an economy that's completely reopened (we may not get there for awhile), the asymptomatic transmission of this virus (CDC says 35% asymptomatic) has the ability to cause a major explosion. That's the reason the measures were taken regarding schools, nursing homes, public gathering places, etc. Reason 2 was to avoid a surge that overwhelmed the medical system. In both cases, those plans worked. We're now seeing the benefit of warmer weather, which will allow economic activity while keeping people somewhat more separated. However, i believe we're going to see a major wave this winter absent fairly strict restrictions at that time. Where it goes from there will again depend on policymakers and citizens both taking it as seriously as we did the first month.



User avatar
allcat
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7938
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:13 pm
Location: 90 miles from Nirvana (Bobcat Stadium)

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by allcat » Wed May 27, 2020 6:19 am

onceacat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 11:28 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 8:56 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
The CDC has some really interesting projections available - I'm guessing this is where you got your 0.4% death rate estimate from as their most recent "best estimate". Their confidence interval of possible death rates in their five scenarios runs from 0.2% on the low end to 1% on the high end, so there's still quite a bit of uncertainty at this time about what the true death rate actually is (the death rates of 0.8 - 0.9% assumed by the early models you call asinine are still inside the CDC's confidence interval, by the way).

I think that as you say, it's important to look at the data from an impartial standpoint and not try to cherry-pick certain numbers to score political points - this can easily be done by people at both ends of the political spectrum since there are so many ways of looking at the available data.

The problem I see with your argument is that today, we have orders of magnitude more data available to look at than we did back in March when the decisions to implement stay-at-home orders and business closures were originally put in place. If we knew in March what the data now shows in May, would things have been a little different? Likely so! But we have to look at the decisions that were made from a viewpoint of what the data showed at that time, which was much more limited and even the CDC at the time was predicting a higher death rate than they are now. I don't think reasonable people ever looked at the original models with 100% certainty they were correct - the problem, on the other hand, was that there was so much uncertainty at the time that the saying of "hope for the best, but plan for the worst" was pretty much all we had to go on to inform the decision making process.

What is 100% certain is that the mitigation measures that were put in place DID substantially lower the number of cases, and DID substantially lower the number of deaths. No, we don't know exactly what the numbers would have been without those measures. It's incredibly difficult to debate the relative importance of human lives vs damage to the economy, largely because we don't have the full picture yet of how this pandemic will play out over the next months and years. I think most people would agree though that there needs to be a balance between the two, although individuals will inevitably disagree on exactly where the fulcrum point of the see-saw with the economy on one side and public health on the other side should be located.

What we can do is ask ourselves if the data we have now justifies the decisions that are being made now. I'd say the answer is a resounding yes as states begin the process of reopening.
Thats an awfully reasonable statement at this point. I'd throw in one caveat regarding the CDC's assumption of Infection Fatality Rate: Since none of the antibody tests have gone through the normal testing process, its impossible to know how many false positives are being counted in the overall infection rate.

If its true that 18,000,0000 people have had the virus and not been tested, then you can get close to the .4% Infection Fatality Rate. And, quite frankly, if there are 18,000,000 people currently carrying an disease with a .4% fatality rate, that should scare us into locking down and never coming out again, because it means that 10,000,000 of us are going to die before this is all said and done, and its well beyond our control to do anything other than hunker down.

If airplanes had a 1% chance of dying, nobody would ever fly. Heck, if "only" .4% of airplanes crashed, nobody would ever fly.

Given the false
300,000,000 times .4% comes to 1,200,000 not 10,000,000


Now sorry for caring about Cat/griz too much. I've been properly chastised by the coach of the other team. :-^

ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4477
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by ilovethecats » Wed May 27, 2020 1:01 pm

GoldstoneCat wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 5:26 am
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
Most people aren't dying, you're correct. People that aren't dying, however, are getting very sick in some, not all, cases. People report being sicker than they've ever been. Healthy people in their 40s developing clots that are causing large-vessel strokes. Absent that, many are bedridden for multiple weeks. Now, are those issues reason enough for the measures we saw taken? Perhaps not. But just because healthy working people aren't dying in huge numbers doesn't mean it's not making them very sick in many cases, and also doesn't mean it's not something to fear/respect/pay damn close attention to.
I understand lots of what you're saying. Agree with some of it even. Personally, I haven't and won't "fear" this thing; but I'd concede it's something that should be paid attention to and we shouldn't disregard what it can do. That has never been my issue. I think it needs to be paid attention to like every other form of death. I don't think it needs to paid attention to MORE than other forms of death. And it most certainly has been. And the stats so far show it didn't warrant the attention it got. Especially if the attention it got leads to more deaths than the virus itself, which some scientists, doctors and experts have suggested it could.

I'd also probably dispute the notion that it's "many" people who are becoming very sick. It certainly doesn't seem that way based on what I have read, but I'll concede I don't know. I've heard that a huge percentage of people who contract the virus either show zero symptoms at all, or very mild symptoms. I'd be curious though of the million or so that have tested positive in the US, how many of those were sicker than they have ever been, or faced unusual circumstances like being so young and getting strokes. My guess would be a tiny percentage but again, I'm just guessing.



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5204
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by iaafan » Wed May 27, 2020 1:28 pm

ilovethecats wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:01 pm
GoldstoneCat wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 5:26 am
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
Most people aren't dying, you're correct. People that aren't dying, however, are getting very sick in some, not all, cases. People report being sicker than they've ever been. Healthy people in their 40s developing clots that are causing large-vessel strokes. Absent that, many are bedridden for multiple weeks. Now, are those issues reason enough for the measures we saw taken? Perhaps not. But just because healthy working people aren't dying in huge numbers doesn't mean it's not making them very sick in many cases, and also doesn't mean it's not something to fear/respect/pay damn close attention to.
I understand lots of what you're saying. Agree with some of it even. Personally, I haven't and won't "fear" this thing; but I'd concede it's something that should be paid attention to and we shouldn't disregard what it can do. That has never been my issue. I think it needs to be paid attention to like every other form of death. I don't think it needs to paid attention to MORE than other forms of death. And it most certainly has been. And the stats so far show it didn't warrant the attention it got. Especially if the attention it got leads to more deaths than the virus itself, which some scientists, doctors and experts have suggested it could.

I'd also probably dispute the notion that it's "many" people who are becoming very sick. It certainly doesn't seem that way based on what I have read, but I'll concede I don't know. I've heard that a huge percentage of people who contract the virus either show zero symptoms at all, or very mild symptoms. I'd be curious though of the million or so that have tested positive in the US, how many of those were sicker than they have ever been, or faced unusual circumstances like being so young and getting strokes. My guess would be a tiny percentage but again, I'm just guessing.
I'm interested in knowing how you came to this opinion.



ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4477
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by ilovethecats » Wed May 27, 2020 1:54 pm

iaafan wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:28 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:01 pm
GoldstoneCat wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 5:26 am
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
Most people aren't dying, you're correct. People that aren't dying, however, are getting very sick in some, not all, cases. People report being sicker than they've ever been. Healthy people in their 40s developing clots that are causing large-vessel strokes. Absent that, many are bedridden for multiple weeks. Now, are those issues reason enough for the measures we saw taken? Perhaps not. But just because healthy working people aren't dying in huge numbers doesn't mean it's not making them very sick in many cases, and also doesn't mean it's not something to fear/respect/pay damn close attention to.
I understand lots of what you're saying. Agree with some of it even. Personally, I haven't and won't "fear" this thing; but I'd concede it's something that should be paid attention to and we shouldn't disregard what it can do. That has never been my issue. I think it needs to be paid attention to like every other form of death. I don't think it needs to paid attention to MORE than other forms of death. And it most certainly has been. And the stats so far show it didn't warrant the attention it got. Especially if the attention it got leads to more deaths than the virus itself, which some scientists, doctors and experts have suggested it could.

I'd also probably dispute the notion that it's "many" people who are becoming very sick. It certainly doesn't seem that way based on what I have read, but I'll concede I don't know. I've heard that a huge percentage of people who contract the virus either show zero symptoms at all, or very mild symptoms. I'd be curious though of the million or so that have tested positive in the US, how many of those were sicker than they have ever been, or faced unusual circumstances like being so young and getting strokes. My guess would be a tiny percentage but again, I'm just guessing.
I'm interested in knowing how you came to this opinion.
Well, mainly the things I mentioned above. Many experts are now suggesting the aftermath of deciding to shut down our economy and our education system will result in more deaths than the virus itself. So if it's about saving lives then this is backwards and didn't warrant those actions.

Then we were told, hey, it's not just about saving lives...it's so we don't overload our hospitals. Except that other than a few hotspots, for a few weeks, no hospitals in the country were close to being overloaded. They did however have to eliminate positions, furlough others, and postpone surgeries. Some hospitals will have to close.

Then we were told, hey it's irresponsible to compare this virus to other things, like heart disease, cancer, the "other" flu, etc. This is WAY more serious. Except the numbers don't show that. By the end of the year I'll bet anything all those other "less scary" means of death will outweigh this one. But hey, when that happens we can just say the ONLY reason that is the case, is because we shut down our economy and took kids out of school! It certainly couldn't be anything else! Who cares if it leads to homelessness, domestic abuse, starvation, suicide and poorly educated kids! It was worth it. \:D/



User avatar
WalkOn79
Member # Retired
Posts: 2506
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:47 pm
Location: Bozeman

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by WalkOn79 » Wed May 27, 2020 4:34 pm

ilovethecats wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:54 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:28 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:01 pm
GoldstoneCat wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 5:26 am
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
Most people aren't dying, you're correct. People that aren't dying, however, are getting very sick in some, not all, cases. People report being sicker than they've ever been. Healthy people in their 40s developing clots that are causing large-vessel strokes. Absent that, many are bedridden for multiple weeks. Now, are those issues reason enough for the measures we saw taken? Perhaps not. But just because healthy working people aren't dying in huge numbers doesn't mean it's not making them very sick in many cases, and also doesn't mean it's not something to fear/respect/pay damn close attention to.
I understand lots of what you're saying. Agree with some of it even. Personally, I haven't and won't "fear" this thing; but I'd concede it's something that should be paid attention to and we shouldn't disregard what it can do. That has never been my issue. I think it needs to be paid attention to like every other form of death. I don't think it needs to paid attention to MORE than other forms of death. And it most certainly has been. And the stats so far show it didn't warrant the attention it got. Especially if the attention it got leads to more deaths than the virus itself, which some scientists, doctors and experts have suggested it could.

I'd also probably dispute the notion that it's "many" people who are becoming very sick. It certainly doesn't seem that way based on what I have read, but I'll concede I don't know. I've heard that a huge percentage of people who contract the virus either show zero symptoms at all, or very mild symptoms. I'd be curious though of the million or so that have tested positive in the US, how many of those were sicker than they have ever been, or faced unusual circumstances like being so young and getting strokes. My guess would be a tiny percentage but again, I'm just guessing.
I'm interested in knowing how you came to this opinion.
Well, mainly the things I mentioned above. Many experts are now suggesting the aftermath of deciding to shut down our economy and our education system will result in more deaths than the virus itself. So if it's about saving lives then this is backwards and didn't warrant those actions.

Then we were told, hey, it's not just about saving lives...it's so we don't overload our hospitals. Except that other than a few hotspots, for a few weeks, no hospitals in the country were close to being overloaded. They did however have to eliminate positions, furlough others, and postpone surgeries. Some hospitals will have to close.

Then we were told, hey it's irresponsible to compare this virus to other things, like heart disease, cancer, the "other" flu, etc. This is WAY more serious. Except the numbers don't show that. By the end of the year I'll bet anything all those other "less scary" means of death will outweigh this one. But hey, when that happens we can just say the ONLY reason that is the case, is because we shut down our economy and took kids out of school! It certainly couldn't be anything else! Who cares if it leads to homelessness, domestic abuse, starvation, suicide and poorly educated kids! It was worth it. \:D/
=D^ =D^ =D^


"One of the greatest feelings in the world, moving someone from point A to point B against their will"

Mitch Brott - 2019 Cat / Griz

mommacat
BobcatNation Redshirt
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 5:35 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by mommacat » Wed May 27, 2020 7:41 pm

I think the general public forgets how decimating a viral infection to a small community could be. I am not talking about deaths or hospital overload. I am talking about a situation like the entire grocery store staff becoming ill. The store would have to close and could not service the community. Or other essential services- drug stores, veterinary hospitals, churches, the only gas station in town, etc. If the community members have no other option for those services, it would be devastating.



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5204
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by iaafan » Wed May 27, 2020 7:54 pm

ilovethecats wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:54 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:28 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:01 pm
GoldstoneCat wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 5:26 am
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
Most people aren't dying, you're correct. People that aren't dying, however, are getting very sick in some, not all, cases. People report being sicker than they've ever been. Healthy people in their 40s developing clots that are causing large-vessel strokes. Absent that, many are bedridden for multiple weeks. Now, are those issues reason enough for the measures we saw taken? Perhaps not. But just because healthy working people aren't dying in huge numbers doesn't mean it's not making them very sick in many cases, and also doesn't mean it's not something to fear/respect/pay damn close attention to.
I understand lots of what you're saying. Agree with some of it even. Personally, I haven't and won't "fear" this thing; but I'd concede it's something that should be paid attention to and we shouldn't disregard what it can do. That has never been my issue. I think it needs to be paid attention to like every other form of death. I don't think it needs to paid attention to MORE than other forms of death. And it most certainly has been. And the stats so far show it didn't warrant the attention it got. Especially if the attention it got leads to more deaths than the virus itself, which some scientists, doctors and experts have suggested it could.

I'd also probably dispute the notion that it's "many" people who are becoming very sick. It certainly doesn't seem that way based on what I have read, but I'll concede I don't know. I've heard that a huge percentage of people who contract the virus either show zero symptoms at all, or very mild symptoms. I'd be curious though of the million or so that have tested positive in the US, how many of those were sicker than they have ever been, or faced unusual circumstances like being so young and getting strokes. My guess would be a tiny percentage but again, I'm just guessing.
I'm interested in knowing how you came to this opinion.
Well, mainly the things I mentioned above. Many experts are now suggesting the aftermath of deciding to shut down our economy and our education system will result in more deaths than the virus itself. So if it's about saving lives then this is backwards and didn't warrant those actions.

Then we were told, hey, it's not just about saving lives...it's so we don't overload our hospitals. Except that other than a few hotspots, for a few weeks, no hospitals in the country were close to being overloaded. They did however have to eliminate positions, furlough others, and postpone surgeries. Some hospitals will have to close.

Then we were told, hey it's irresponsible to compare this virus to other things, like heart disease, cancer, the "other" flu, etc. This is WAY more serious. Except the numbers don't show that. By the end of the year I'll bet anything all those other "less scary" means of death will outweigh this one. But hey, when that happens we can just say the ONLY reason that is the case, is because we shut down our economy and took kids out of school! It certainly couldn't be anything else! Who cares if it leads to homelessness, domestic abuse, starvation, suicide and poorly educated kids! It was worth it. \:D/
Which experts are saying that? And in what context? And what are they basing their opinions on? And are they having their hypothesis tested? And has there been a consensus on any of that? Have you looked or fact-checked that?

You seem to be just taking anything you hear that's supports Covid not being that bad and running with it without fact-checking it. It's gotten bizarre, frankly, because you've been presenting yourself as this level-headed guy that always looks at both sides of the argument before forming an opinion. Numerous people explain to you how models work, but you (intentionally?) seem to be pretending to not get it or not acknowledge it. How many times have you come on here and said, "We were told that 2 million people would die?" Then someone explains to you why the model said that and you never have acknowledged that. You just go away for a few days and then come back and pump that same BS in here. You try to play the, "Oh, I'm just a regular ol' level-headed guy that looks at things from both sides." But that's not the case. You just let what numerous people explain to you, fly by.

Instead of busting the chops of models, why don't you think about the possibility that the fact the models gave such dire warnings, they saved hundreds of thousands of lives? Isn't it possible that once people heard how bad it could be, they buckled down and did things to keep it from getting worse? Again, models produce results based on the data input into them. The 2-3 million deaths model factored in no one doing anything, similar to the Spanish Flu. The Spanish Flu produced an "estimated" (there will be an estimation on this pandemic as well someday) 675,000 deaths during a time that America had 100,000,000 people. If that had occurred with 300,000,000 people it would've produced 675,000 x 3 = 2 million deaths, possibly. So when the data was input for corona it was done with a higher death rate, which is still the case, and therefore came out with the numbers it had...2-3 million. Sounds about right to me, based on what we know about a somewhat similar pandemic.

Then more of the same about "we were told...saving lives...overload hospitals." Yeah, hello, it is about saving lives. It is about not overloading hospitals. But you act like since the hospitals didn't get overloaded, for the most part, and 2 million people didn't die that someone f--ked up. Instead of saying, thank god, it didn't get that bad. In some places the virus didn't infest itself. Or if it was about to, it was thwarted by people doing what was needed to turn it back. It didn't just magically not get as bad as feared because people just didn't know what they were talking about. Has that ever washed over your brain?

It is irresponsible to compare this to any other virus or disease out there. That's what the "novel" part means. Novel = new. Don't compare something you don't know relatively anything about to something that's been around for decades. As in we don't know what the hell it is and all early indications are it's very bad. The numbers DON'T show that? I'd say the numbers have definitely shown that. It's a matter of opinion, I guess, but to me when something that we "shutdown" for still kills 100,000 people in basically two months, that means it would've been a lot worse (how much worse?) than if we just let everyone go about their business. We could cut down on the number of cancer, flu, etc deaths if we did more, but those are novel. They've been around. We know what they do every year and, you can opine about this all you want, but no one is all fired up about wearing a mask or whatever to keep it from spreading. We're just used to it, I guess. I don't know.

This anti-mask thing is pretty pitiful IMO. How much time a day on average do people get put in a position where wearing a mask is kosher? Sure, some have to do it more than others, but the average Joe on the street is hardly ever in a position where wearing a mask is kosher? Grocery store = 30 minutes a week, but usually one person per family does that, so in a family of four, that's 7.5 minutes per week. I wear one when I feel it's kosher and that amounts to about 30 minutes per week. 30 minutes out of 16 waking hours a day x 7 days/week (6,720 waking minutes) comes to .00446 of the time. Gee, we're really being put out. Same for social distancing. The average Joe is hardly ever in position to need to social distance. But oh my god we should go kill ourselves if we have to do this.

What else? Oh yeah, the economy sucking is going to kill a ton of people. Where is that data coming from? The Great Depression? If so, it might be worth noting that the Great Depression lasted a decade. Corona won't last that long and if it does. If we can't cure the virus in ten years, then we likely never will.

Then there's the overcounted death rate, which still gets mentioned despite the obvious fact that it has been undercounted. Maybe some day it will be overcounted, but as of right now that's not the case. When it was at 50,000 dead from corona in late April, we were still 30,000 over the average. People were counting those as flu and pnuemonia deaths even though the time frame for those to still be occurring at that had passed. Conservatively, 20,000 were covid. Of the 50,000 dead since, probably another 10,000. That runs the total to around 130,000, but whatever. When the dust settle, the CDC and WHO will estimate the number of dead from covid using that variable (deaths over average).

And there are lots of examples of Americans stepping up and implementing new normals for things that are killing people at a rate less than cancer, cigarettes, etc. Look at bike, ski, skateboard, etc. helmets. Forty years ago, you would never see anyone wearing a helmet. How many people died riding bikes, skiing, etc. before helmets became the norm? How lives do helmets save?



I've read that suicide rates are down, did you read that? I've heard that despite the fact that there are a lot of bad things happening, there's also some good things happening. Not that those good things are worth it, but they're there.



User avatar
grizzh8r
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5954
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:23 pm
Location: Billings via Livingston
Contact:

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by grizzh8r » Wed May 27, 2020 11:20 pm

iaafan wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 7:54 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:54 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:28 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 1:01 pm
GoldstoneCat wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 5:26 am
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:47 pm
seataccat wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:58 pm
Rich K wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 4:22 pm
MSU01 wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 1:06 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 12:37 pm

Despite the fact I know you’re being facetious, I guess I would agree with you to a point. The man is in charge. He’s gonna take criticism as well as praise. We were told a couple months ago 2-3 million Americans would die. Less than 100,000 have so far so I suppose that’s considered a “success”. Tough looking at it that way in regards to lives, but the numbers are the numbers.

If they would have predicted like 10,000 US deaths and 100,000 died, I’d say our President did pretty lousy. As much as I thought the restrictions and closures were a huge overreaction, all things considered I guess you could make the case our leader saved almost 2-3 million American lives with the actions taken.

I still hate it though! :wink:
I think you're misusing that 2-3 million deaths number. This was the number of deaths predicted by the leading scientific models if zero mitigating action had been taken, and life had just continued to go on completely as normal as the virus spread through the country. Once actions like stay-at-home orders and business closures were put in place by local and state governments, the predicted number of deaths (and actual numbers of deaths) plummeted. While I'm sure there were some hysterical far-left people still touting that 2-3 million number after measures were taken, just as there were hysterical far-right people calling the virus a completely non-dangerous hoax, no reasonable person still thought there would be millions of deaths once the government started to take action.

Anyway, today is the 5th consecutive day with zero new cases in Montana. Great news and I'm becoming much more optimistic that we'll be in Bobcat Stadium watching football once September rolls around.
Misusing numbers? Who would have thunk it? There is no such thing as a "leading scientific model" that predicted this. For it to be a "leading scientific model" the model would have been published and critical evaluation encouraged. The "leading scientific models" for Covid exists in the same undisclosed location as global warming models.

The 2-3 million deaths was pulled out of somebody's ass.
Believe it or not scientists model such things all the time based on historical data, scientific extrapolations and educated guesses of the variables. Some are better than others. This virus may very well kill millions. The worst pandemic in history was the Spanish Flu and they estimated that it killed 670k in the U.S. The corona virus may still rival that in the two years it took for those deaths to occur. Keep believing that this virus is a worldwide hoax against Trump, that there is no such thing as global warming and that the moon is made of cheese.
In my far too many posts on this subject, I have not one time suggested it was a hoax. Nor did I ever relate it to politics like so many like to do.

I said the original models were asinine. Far too high death counts and far too high death rates. Every day I wake up it seems my guesses were far closer than the guesses of those panicking.

Also, I maintain it’s very shady that they can just throw out monster numbers, claim that’s how many will die, then when life as we know it is paused, give ALL the credit to the lockdowns. It’s a cop out. So some people really still believe that it was impossible that this virus simply was never as dangerous as people said it’d be?

Which brings me to my last thought. Why are we so quick to believe the original experts and scientists with 100% certainty. They were so unequivocally correct we shut down the economy and closed schools, no questions asked. However, since that time there have been countless other experts and scientists claiming the exact opposite. Suggesting it’s not near as serious as first thought and the cure is worse than the problem. Why do we dismiss them? This has bothered me for a while now. We’ll believe any terrible over the top news, but if someone disputes any of those facts they’re somehow the bad guy?

Weird stuff. But no, I certainly don’t think this virus is a hoax. I think it’s a very contagious virus with a low death rate. I think we’re at about .40% death rate now. Far lower when you consider nearly all deaths are old, mostly in nursing homes, and almost always with underlying conditions. Just can’t figure out what people are so worried about. But I’m trying!!
Most people aren't dying, you're correct. People that aren't dying, however, are getting very sick in some, not all, cases. People report being sicker than they've ever been. Healthy people in their 40s developing clots that are causing large-vessel strokes. Absent that, many are bedridden for multiple weeks. Now, are those issues reason enough for the measures we saw taken? Perhaps not. But just because healthy working people aren't dying in huge numbers doesn't mean it's not making them very sick in many cases, and also doesn't mean it's not something to fear/respect/pay damn close attention to.
I understand lots of what you're saying. Agree with some of it even. Personally, I haven't and won't "fear" this thing; but I'd concede it's something that should be paid attention to and we shouldn't disregard what it can do. That has never been my issue. I think it needs to be paid attention to like every other form of death. I don't think it needs to paid attention to MORE than other forms of death. And it most certainly has been. And the stats so far show it didn't warrant the attention it got. Especially if the attention it got leads to more deaths than the virus itself, which some scientists, doctors and experts have suggested it could.

I'd also probably dispute the notion that it's "many" people who are becoming very sick. It certainly doesn't seem that way based on what I have read, but I'll concede I don't know. I've heard that a huge percentage of people who contract the virus either show zero symptoms at all, or very mild symptoms. I'd be curious though of the million or so that have tested positive in the US, how many of those were sicker than they have ever been, or faced unusual circumstances like being so young and getting strokes. My guess would be a tiny percentage but again, I'm just guessing.
I'm interested in knowing how you came to this opinion.
Well, mainly the things I mentioned above. Many experts are now suggesting the aftermath of deciding to shut down our economy and our education system will result in more deaths than the virus itself. So if it's about saving lives then this is backwards and didn't warrant those actions.

Then we were told, hey, it's not just about saving lives...it's so we don't overload our hospitals. Except that other than a few hotspots, for a few weeks, no hospitals in the country were close to being overloaded. They did however have to eliminate positions, furlough others, and postpone surgeries. Some hospitals will have to close.

Then we were told, hey it's irresponsible to compare this virus to other things, like heart disease, cancer, the "other" flu, etc. This is WAY more serious. Except the numbers don't show that. By the end of the year I'll bet anything all those other "less scary" means of death will outweigh this one. But hey, when that happens we can just say the ONLY reason that is the case, is because we shut down our economy and took kids out of school! It certainly couldn't be anything else! Who cares if it leads to homelessness, domestic abuse, starvation, suicide and poorly educated kids! It was worth it. \:D/
Which experts are saying that? And in what context? And what are they basing their opinions on? And are they having their hypothesis tested? And has there been a consensus on any of that? Have you looked or fact-checked that?

You seem to be just taking anything you hear that's supports Covid not being that bad and running with it without fact-checking it. It's gotten bizarre, frankly, because you've been presenting yourself as this level-headed guy that always looks at both sides of the argument before forming an opinion. Numerous people explain to you how models work, but you (intentionally?) seem to be pretending to not get it or not acknowledge it. How many times have you come on here and said, "We were told that 2 million people would die?" Then someone explains to you why the model said that and you never have acknowledged that. You just go away for a few days and then come back and pump that same BS in here. You try to play the, "Oh, I'm just a regular ol' level-headed guy that looks at things from both sides." But that's not the case. You just let what numerous people explain to you, fly by.

Instead of busting the chops of models, why don't you think about the possibility that the fact the models gave such dire warnings, they saved hundreds of thousands of lives? Isn't it possible that once people heard how bad it could be, they buckled down and did things to keep it from getting worse? Again, models produce results based on the data input into them. The 2-3 million deaths model factored in no one doing anything, similar to the Spanish Flu. The Spanish Flu produced an "estimated" (there will be an estimation on this pandemic as well someday) 675,000 deaths during a time that America had 100,000,000 people. If that had occurred with 300,000,000 people it would've produced 675,000 x 3 = 2 million deaths, possibly. So when the data was input for corona it was done with a higher death rate, which is still the case, and therefore came out with the numbers it had...2-3 million. Sounds about right to me, based on what we know about a somewhat similar pandemic.

Then more of the same about "we were told...saving lives...overload hospitals." Yeah, hello, it is about saving lives. It is about not overloading hospitals. But you act like since the hospitals didn't get overloaded, for the most part, and 2 million people didn't die that someone f--ked up. Instead of saying, thank god, it didn't get that bad. In some places the virus didn't infest itself. Or if it was about to, it was thwarted by people doing what was needed to turn it back. It didn't just magically not get as bad as feared because people just didn't know what they were talking about. Has that ever washed over your brain?

It is irresponsible to compare this to any other virus or disease out there. That's what the "novel" part means. Novel = new. Don't compare something you don't know relatively anything about to something that's been around for decades. As in we don't know what the hell it is and all early indications are it's very bad. The numbers DON'T show that? I'd say the numbers have definitely shown that. It's a matter of opinion, I guess, but to me when something that we "shutdown" for still kills 100,000 people in basically two months, that means it would've been a lot worse (how much worse?) than if we just let everyone go about their business. We could cut down on the number of cancer, flu, etc deaths if we did more, but those are novel. They've been around. We know what they do every year and, you can opine about this all you want, but no one is all fired up about wearing a mask or whatever to keep it from spreading. We're just used to it, I guess. I don't know.

This anti-mask thing is pretty pitiful IMO. How much time a day on average do people get put in a position where wearing a mask is kosher? Sure, some have to do it more than others, but the average Joe on the street is hardly ever in a position where wearing a mask is kosher? Grocery store = 30 minutes a week, but usually one person per family does that, so in a family of four, that's 7.5 minutes per week. I wear one when I feel it's kosher and that amounts to about 30 minutes per week. 30 minutes out of 16 waking hours a day x 7 days/week (6,720 waking minutes) comes to .00446 of the time. Gee, we're really being put out. Same for social distancing. The average Joe is hardly ever in position to need to social distance. But oh my god we should go kill ourselves if we have to do this.

What else? Oh yeah, the economy sucking is going to kill a ton of people. Where is that data coming from? The Great Depression? If so, it might be worth noting that the Great Depression lasted a decade. Corona won't last that long and if it does. If we can't cure the virus in ten years, then we likely never will.

Then there's the overcounted death rate, which still gets mentioned despite the obvious fact that it has been undercounted. Maybe some day it will be overcounted, but as of right now that's not the case. When it was at 50,000 dead from corona in late April, we were still 30,000 over the average. People were counting those as flu and pnuemonia deaths even though the time frame for those to still be occurring at that had passed. Conservatively, 20,000 were covid. Of the 50,000 dead since, probably another 10,000. That runs the total to around 130,000, but whatever. When the dust settle, the CDC and WHO will estimate the number of dead from covid using that variable (deaths over average).

And there are lots of examples of Americans stepping up and implementing new normals for things that are killing people at a rate less than cancer, cigarettes, etc. Look at bike, ski, skateboard, etc. helmets. Forty years ago, you would never see anyone wearing a helmet. How many people died riding bikes, skiing, etc. before helmets became the norm? How lives do helmets save?



I've read that suicide rates are down, did you read that? I've heard that despite the fact that there are a lot of bad things happening, there's also some good things happening. Not that those good things are worth it, but they're there.
Funny, I've read that suicide rates are up, domestic abuse is up, starvation due to disrupted food supply chain is up (one estimate I saw was 130 million people more people starving than before 'Rona). Shoot, here in Billings, I've noticed an increase in the number of people living in their cars. I drive up Zimmerman Trail and past the airport every day going to work and I see cars parked in the same spot every day, packed full of belongings. They weren't there in early March. So homelessness is up, too.

Then there's the letter signed by 600+ doctors across the nation recently sent to President Trump pleading for him to do something, stating that it's looking more and more like the "cure" is worse than the disease. Besides all of the above I just covered, people aren't coming in for their preventative exams - because they are prohibited from doing so - that are often crucial to catching the first signs of impending health troubles (cancer, diabetes, hypertension, high blood pressure, heart conditions, etc.). Addicts turning back to destructive lifestyles because they can't meet with their support groups.

And don't even go there with the "under-counted" nonsense. When hospitals are coding a guy who died from a gunshot wound but tested positive for 'Rona, THAT'S A PROBLEM. And it's happening on a widespread basis for any number of other forms of death, because of the "recommendation" from the powers that be to count them as 'Rona deaths.

The vast majority (80% or so) of the deceased are people who were in a comorbid state, had compromised immune systems, or were the 80+ year olds (who have suppressed immune systems simply due to old age). Basically most of these folks are a ticking time bomb anyways, a broken hip, a bad cold or influenza A could spell the end. That may sound callous but it's reality. That's what you're failing to acknowledge.


Eric Curry STILL makes me sad.
94VegasCat wrote:Are you for real? That is just a plain ol dumb paragraph! You just nailed every note in the Full Retard sing-a-long choir!!!
:rofl:

User avatar
catsrback76
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7544
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:18 am
Location: 2300 meters up in Ethiopia!

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by catsrback76 » Thu May 28, 2020 3:39 am

Projections underestimated the impacts. Interesting graphs from early projections and what is likely between now and August.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... uAk_URdZhs



User avatar
Montanabob
2nd Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1406
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 8:29 pm
Location: Two Dot

Re: Alright, let's discuss the elephant in the room.

Post by Montanabob » Thu May 28, 2020 8:26 am

catsrback76 wrote:
Thu May 28, 2020 3:39 am
Projections underestimated the impacts. Interesting graphs from early projections and what is likely between now and August.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... uAk_URdZhs
Are they taking into account the invalid deaths reported by states? Like the 5 gunshot victims that died of Covid 19?


MSU fan.... U of I Graduate... They're Back

Post Reply