Defensive Carry banner

161 - 180 of 180 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,940 Posts
I take ZERO responsibility for the health of others. If one of them had a heart attack, it would be on them since I was just minding my business and checking out.
But if they both were Democrats and had the big one right there......now that would be humorous beyond words. I have no empathy for people like these two last night.
Stay out of my face, and I stay out of yours.
nailed it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,940 Posts
I'm just wondering if the information that the virus matched that found in two animals before any people were infected was provided by the CCP? If so, I wouldn't give it too much credence.
Fruit tested positive. People who never took a test have tested positive. Anything is possible with these tests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CWOUSCG

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,940 Posts
I'm just saying that I wouldn't believe the CCP if they told me that the sky was blue.
Yeah, I get that, im just saying that getting outside of Chinas borders doesnt increase the credibility by much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
But the unbiased scientific community has yet to quantify the lethality of covid relative to influenza.
You keep making this claim.

You are incorrect.

It's more deadly than the flu. But exactly how much more deadly, we don't know.
Speak for yourself. You don't know.

I do know, as do all other statisticians, epidemiologists and virologists who care to pick up a calculator.

In fact, there are only TWO inputs, widely available from numerous sources, including my favorite source, STAT's The Covid-19 Tracker:

Recovered Cases ("Recovered" in my favorite source)
Fatal Cases ("Deaths" in my favorite source)

Here's how the math works:

1. Total Resolved Cases = Recovered Cases + Fatal Cases

2. Mortality Rate = Fatal Cases / Total Resolved Cases

Are you with me so far?

3. Compute the Mortality Rate for the U.S. as a whole, then do the same for the Seasonal Flu (data widely available).

4. Divide the Covid-19 Mortality Rate (4.7204%) by the Seasonal Flu Mortality Rate (0.0905%) and you get 52.1.

THAT'S IT, PEF. Four very simple, straightforward steps. NOT rocket science, so if you would, kindly stop pretending it is.

It could be 3x, 5x, 10x, or maybe even more.
It's 52.1x as of two days ago.

But I have yet to find any definitive quantification...
Scroll up.

...that has been embraced by the people that work on this day to day.
Look harder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
all this could be simplified by the fact that someone who is not sick is not at risk of getting anyone else sick.
Your statement is predicated upon the false assumption that symptomless carriers don't exist.

Reality: Symptomless carriers do exist.

Also, your math is flawed because you are assuming a certain level of protection from the mask they were wearing that you can not guarantee.
No flaw. No assumption.

It's real world test data.

Enjoy your day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
I doubt people as a whole will ever settle on anything due to using different sets of data to obtain their results. There is no data set that is absolutely correct, but we could say the same about the seasonal flu as well.
The various sets of data I use are very close to one another -- within 1% or 2% -- despite being from independent sources, and this includes the data on seasonal flu, as well.

More than "good enough." In fact, it's pretty darn outstanding.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,773 Posts
Discussion Starter · #169 ·
You keep making this claim.

You are incorrect.



Speak for yourself. You don't know.

I do know, as do all other statisticians, epidemiologists and virologists who care to pick up a calculator.

In fact, there are only TWO inputs, widely available from numerous sources, including my favorite source, STAT's The Covid-19 Tracker:

Recovered Cases ("Recovered" in my favorite source)
Fatal Cases ("Deaths" in my favorite source)

Here's how the math works:

1. Total Resolved Cases = Recovered Cases + Fatal Cases

2. Mortality Rate = Fatal Cases / Total Resolved Cases

Are you with me so far?

3. Compute the Mortality Rate for the U.S. as a whole, then do the same for the Seasonal Flu (data widely available).

4. Divide the Covid-19 Mortality Rate (4.7204%) by the Seasonal Flu Mortality Rate (0.0905%) and you get 52.1.

THAT'S IT, PEF. Four very simple, straightforward steps. NOT rocket science, so if you would, kindly stop pretending it is.

It's 52.1x as of two days ago.

Scroll up.


Look harder.
I'm purty good at math. Especially basic algebra. And I'm not saying it's rocket science.

Sir, you keep claiming 52.1x is the number. But based on Gnius' data of 1.7%, it's 18.8x. So are the data Gnius provided wrong? An outlier? Noisy?

Look, all I am saying is we know Covid is more deadly than the flu, but we do not now how much more. I've reviewed NEJM, CDC, and other sources. The estimates on the very low end are "at least 3," and some are in excess of 10x. And then there are a number of C19 cases that went undiagnosed. We have decades of flu data and models, but the data for c19 are still emerging.

I have no doubt C19 is more deadly than the flu, especially in certain age ranges and for people with certain co-morbidities. But just pulling data off the internet from several sources and crunching numbers is not conclusive to me. And I find it hard to discount the CDC, NEJM, and myriad other sources when presented with the data you have collected and crunched.

If you are so confident in your calculations, write up a paper and submit it for peer review instead of arguing with me. Not trying to be snarky; if it turns out your are right, then that's information that the medical community should know.

Again, I don't know why we are engaging in this question of how much more lethal c19 is compared to the flu. It's well established it is more lethal; but by exactly how much, who knows. It may depend on the country, the populace, the medical care available, etc.

Best,
PEF
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
The actual case mortality is 1.7%.

Thank you for the confirmation. :)

357052


This is in line with other unadjusted case mortality figures for industrialized nations, which range from 1% to 4%.
This includes the early on disasters, so if you limit it to the last few months it's a bit lower, but stays above 1%.
Early in the pandemic, case mortality figures were often the only ones available due to the poor tracking and reporting of case resolutions. While it is an expeditious way of comparing entities with disparate populations, such as countries, it's a misleading metric as you're dividing in part by active cases which have not yet resolved one way or the other.

Dividing Fatalities by Fatalities + Recoveries is the more accurate assessment, and one which is not subject to being skewed by rapidly rising case rates with few resolutions as you'll find early on in any epidemic or pandemic.

Once a disease has run it's course, with all cases having been resolved, the case mortality rate and mortality rate become one and the same.

Sadly, the media, at best, reports case mortality rates, and at worst, reports raw case numbers with zero respect for the size of the population in which they exist.

The inability of the media to properly convey nearly all of the data surrounding Covid-19 is the number one reason why I firmly support all journalists being required to complete a full year of college level calculus, the same as students of engineering, math, chemistry, biology, and other sciences, in addition to a full year of statistics.

I would accept a semester of 5-hour Calc and another semester of Engineering Statistics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
I'm purty good at math. Especially basic algebra. And I'm not saying it's rocket science.

Sir, you keep claiming 52.1x is the number. But based on Gnius' data of 1.7%, it's 18.8x.
Nope. He's reporting Case Mortality rates, and that figure agrees with mine. That's not, however, the metric used to compare the mortality rate of the season flu with the mortality rate of Covid-19. For that, you must use the resolved mortality rate.

we do not now how much more
Yes we do, and I've showed you precisely how the figure is obtained, several times.

Again, I don't know why we are engaging in this question of how much more lethal c19 is compared to the flu.
Simple: You keep insinuating very simple, straightforward math is somehow "wrong" or at the very least, "we can't know that..."

Horsehockey, PEF! It's right smack in front of you and only one step more complicated than 1+1=2, 1+2=3, etc.

YET AGAIN!

There are only TWO inputs, widely available from numerous sources, including my favorite source, STAT's The Covid-19 Tracker:

Recovered Cases ("Recovered" in my favorite source)
Fatal Cases ("Deaths" in my favorite source)

Here's how the math works:

1. Total Resolved Cases = Recovered Cases + Fatal Cases

2. Mortality Rate = Fatal Cases / Total Resolved Cases

Are you with me so far?

3. Compute the Mortality Rate for Covid-19 in the U.S. as a whole, then do the same for the Seasonal Flu (data widely available).

4. Divide the Covid-19 Mortality Rate (4.7204%) by the Seasonal Flu Mortality Rate (0.0905%) and you get 52.1.

THAT'S IT, PEF. Four very simple, straightforward steps. NOT rocket science.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,773 Posts
Discussion Starter · #172 ·
Like I said, write up a paper, submit it for publication. Good luck! If you can prove 52.1x, it's a figure that should be widely disseminated to the medial community.

But if you are so certain, and you are right, it is perplexing why so many other sources cannot pin down a number, but you are the only person able to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,484 Posts
I find it amusing that people keep going round and round about how deadly it is. Completely ignoring the fact that, it's more likely than not, not simply a naturally occurring virus. If it came out of a lab, either accidentally or on purpose, it's the fault of the CCP. Even if it somehow occurred naturally, the CCP conducted a cover up and misinformation campaign for MONTHS before admitting that it could be spread from person to person. They are responsible as surely as if they had killed someone by shooting them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
Supposed to be and going to be are going to be quite different.
China is responsible for the deaths of millions of people throughout the globe and the crashing of economies.
The world, collectively could destroy China economically and sent it back to the Ming Dynasty by stopping trade with them.
They live off of selling cheap goods to the world, and the world is hooked on cheap goods like a crack addict.
So I guess the lives of all those folks is the price we pay for cheap clothes, electronics, poison dog food and toys.
And now that they produce the worlds medications, well we can't do without our uppers and downers and penis pills either.
That lab im China was funded by our own NIH, the lab moved to China once such research was prohibited in US, and it continued to receive US taxpayers money via NIH grant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,940 Posts
The various sets of data I use are very close to one another -- within 1% or 2% -- despite being from independent sources, and this includes the data on seasonal flu, as well.

More than "good enough." In fact, it's pretty darn outstanding.
And the numbers are based on what? The number of “positive” cases? Including or excluding the duplicate tests that account for an unknown number of the “cases”? What is believed to be the real number because of asymptomatic cases that have gone undetected? The recovered cases come up, but there is an assumption that recoveries are all reported. At one point I figured you can’t fake a dead body. I guess that’s supposedly true, but the criteria for what counts as a covid death is pretty broad. With the amount of variation that is possible in each of these data sets. It’s not possible to say with certainty that you have accurate data, unless there are two sets of data. One set that is being presented to the public, and the accurate, I manipulated set that only certain people, including yourself have access to, that nobody wants the public to see.
Your statement is predicated upon the false assumption that symptomless carriers don't exist.

Reality: Symptomless carriers do exist.



No flaw. No assumption.

It's real world test data.

Enjoy your day.
Asymptomatic people for the most part do not spread the virus. This has been repeatedly observed both in studies, and in my own experience each time someone I work with got it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,940 Posts
I find it amusing that people keep going round and round about how deadly it is. Completely ignoring the fact that, it's more likely than not, not simply a naturally occurring virus. If it came out of a lab, either accidentally or on purpose, it's the fault of the CCP. Even if it somehow occurred naturally, the CCP conducted a cover up and misinformation campaign for MONTHS before admitting that it could be spread from person to person. They are responsible as surely as if they had killed someone by shooting them.
To me these are two seperate things. The first is determining whether or not I need to let my chance of getting the virus play a role in my everyday life. The answer to that question is I don’t. Beyond that, screw China. But I’m also interested in knowing more about our role in the development in this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
I no longer wear my mask even if a store has a sign to wear one. If I am in a store that has a requirement to do so, and
[/QUOTE]

You haven't bought some beers for some hospital survivors yet and heard their tale.
Compare those saga & their continual health battles
to keeping a cheap mask in your back pocket
vs "small" risk
vs mask trouble ... which should be as smooth, fast, easy as drawing your gun for self defense
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,484 Posts
I no longer wear my mask even if a store has a sign to wear one. If I am in a store that has a requirement to do so, and
You haven't bought some beers for some hospital survivors yet and heard their tale.
Compare those saga & their continual health battles
to keeping a cheap mask in your back pocket
vs "small" risk
vs mask trouble ... which should be as smooth, fast, easy as drawing your gun for self defense
[/QUOTE]
So, why not just keep wearing masks forever? Because there will always be some new bug waiting just around the corner.
The whole rational behind it is the same as is used for many other things that some people try to get others to do: "If even one life is saved, isn't it worth it? Just make the sacrifice for others!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,940 Posts
You haven't bought some beers for some hospital survivors yet and heard their tale.
Compare those saga & their continual health battles
to keeping a cheap mask in your back pocket
vs "small" risk
vs mask trouble ... which should be as smooth, fast, easy as drawing your gun for self defense
But me keeping a mask in my pocket wouldn’t change any of their situations.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,773 Posts
Discussion Starter · #180 ·
I no longer wear my mask even if a store has a sign to wear one. If I am in a store that has a requirement to do so, and
You haven't bought some beers for some hospital survivors yet and heard their tale.
Compare those saga & their continual health battles
to keeping a cheap mask in your back pocket
vs "small" risk
vs mask trouble ... which should be as smooth, fast, easy as drawing your gun for self defense
[/QUOTE]

Yeah. A cheap mask folded in my back pocket and then hastily applied is really going to save lives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: demanic
161 - 180 of 180 Posts
Top