• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Some Ask a Taboo Question: Is America Overreacting to Coronavirus?

ilovethecats said:
Berkeley_Griz said:
Going off of this, a decent site I'd checked in on from time to time to track positivity rate is here"
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states/usa

Nationwide the positive test rate has been decreasing steadily, which of course is very welcome news, and is often more meaningful than raw number of new positive tests, which often gets all the press (sometimes from people trying to push a particular narrative, or who don't think to account for overall testing rate). The site allows you to do a state by state breakdown as well.
Click to expand...

Whoa Whoa Whoa!!

Are you suggesting for one minute that positive cases and deaths are getting more coverage than test rates decreasing and even recoveries?! That seems like crazy talk. I don't think you're taking this thing seriously enough with suggestions like that....

:coffee:
Click to expand...

Ha, I know right.
 
This is link to daily NYC virus stats. If I'm reading this correctly, those dying without a separate illness, including high blood pressure, are very low. But there's also a category which I think is "unknown", i.e. whether healthy or not (about 3,000 in this category). Am I misreading this?

13,000 have died with underlying health conditions.

With no underlying health conditions:

1 - age 17 and under
22 - 18-44
71 - 45-64
3 - 65-74
2 - 75 and over

So, less than 100 completely healthy people?

https://github.com/nychealth/coronavirus-data/blob/master/deaths/deaths-by-underlying-conditions.csv
 
ranco said:
Hoops watcher said:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/top-israeli-prof-claims-simple-stats-show-virus-plays-itself-out-after-70-days/?fbclid=IwAR1Cj-N0e4eLKUNsY7Gn7lt1i5Oph9uMwBVZCtYGz59rAZUWRbzvprsiNaE

A different look at things.
Click to expand...

I think there is something to this. I've been looking at the numbers world wide very closely and there is a close relationship to the simple passage of time and when each country reaches it's peak. About three weeks ago ago the numbers indicated New York would reach it's peak (as to number of daily new infections/hospitalizations) around April 8, which is largely true. The numbers also showed that the US as a whole would reach a similar peak this week, which also appears to be largely true.

I have been discussing this with my wife for the last three weeks and my unscientific hypothesis was: 1) many more people (likely by a factor of at least 20) have had the virus but were never documented - thus herd immunity was playing a role; 2) there is a definite life span regarding the virus and the duration it remains highly communicable (which is the impetus behind the article) and/or (3) social distancing /shut downs was the primary factor.

Given the predictability in the numbers , I think No.2 might be closer to the correct theory.
Click to expand...

Here is an update on this professor's article. https://www.timesofisrael.com/i-was-right-says-prof-who-predicted-pandemic-would-play-itself-out-in-70-days/, in which he maintains he was right about his mathematical (non-medical) prediction.

He's not a medical doctor but his theory is interesting and while clearly subject to debate, it might have some legitimacy.
 
ilovethecats said:
argh! said:
agree, that's got to be a violation of the constitution.
Click to expand...

Hasn't there been violations of the constitution for a couple months now?
Click to expand...
I guess my question would be, if there are violations to the constitution then why haven't lawmakers taken it to court?..... Maybe they have and I haven't seen it.
 
Interesting article from CNN - regarding Sweden's approach. Pretty apparent the "journalist" could not grasp the actual importance of the story. https://www.cnncreativemarketing.com/project/csr/

Sweden's anti body tests showed that 7.3 % of the population had the virus. The tilt of the article was that Sweden was no where near herd immunity so their approach was flawed.

However, here is the important part from the story:

"Sweden's percentage of people with antibodies is not far off that of other countries that did enforce lockdowns."


The article headline should have been: ENFORCING LOCKDOWNS ONLY HAS MARGINAL BENEFIT

But I guess that wouldn't fit the narrative.
 
ranco said:
Interesting article from CNN - regarding Sweden's approach. Pretty apparent the "journalist" could not grasp the actual importance of the story. https://www.cnncreativemarketing.com/project/csr/

Sweden's anti body tests showed that 7.3 % of the population had the virus. The tilt of the article was that Sweden was no where near herd immunity so their approach was flawed.

However, here is the important part from the story:

"Sweden's percentage of people with antibodies is not far off that of other countries that did enforce lockdowns."


The article headline should have been: ENFORCING LOCKDOWNS ONLY HAS MARGINAL BENEFIT

But I guess that wouldn't fit the narrative.
Click to expand...

you gave a link to a video to be shown later. i doubt you watched it.
 
ranco said:
Interesting article from CNN - regarding Sweden's approach. Pretty apparent the "journalist" could not grasp the actual importance of the story. https://www.cnncreativemarketing.com/project/csr/

Sweden's anti body tests showed that 7.3 % of the population had the virus. The tilt of the article was that Sweden was no where near herd immunity so their approach was flawed.

However, here is the important part from the story:

"Sweden's percentage of people with antibodies is not far off that of other countries that did enforce lockdowns."


The article headline should have been: ENFORCING LOCKDOWNS ONLY HAS MARGINAL BENEFIT

But I guess that wouldn't fit the narrative.
Click to expand...

Dude your conflating Sweden to us. Fuck it’s one of the fittest, healthiest and laid back stress free place on the planet. There people are well taken care of for the good of the society as a whole not just the wealthy oligarchs who can jet away for an island to endure the pandemic. Also it’s a nation state with centralized government and it’s is mapped out for emergency’s better then we are and there really isn’t much dissent because there ethos is more socialistic then ours when it comes to wealth, health and overall general welfare. Our unhealthy and old are going to be getting hammered and there’s something like close to 50 % with underlying health problems unlike Sweden.

Also the numbers you quote don’t sound good when you look at it something like an economy of scale wise. Sweden has 11 million and 7% with antibodies is like 770,000. For then to get to herd immunity of say 60-70 percent it’s like 7 million. so for US to get to 7% we would have to be at like 2.1 million now. Hope math is right. To get to herd immunity we will take something like 60-70 percent infections or something like 200,000,000 with antibodies. Math? And then try and calculate the slower rate it will take to spread like that across a country a gazillion times bigger then Sweden. And along the way how many people will die after getting it as we reach herd immunity it’s got to be huge i would think. And right now the US numbers are like 94,000 dead and 1.5 million. So if we have to reach 200,000,00 what would we lose to get there like somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 for every 2 million that’s like what 1million dead. That’s a lot dude. We lost 57,000 in the nam and that was over 8-9 years. Maybe this will be the reverse of the 60s and the old will March on Washington and take over public buildings and protest at the conventions to get better protection. Lol. I think the lock down was necessary because we had no testing to be able to identify, contain and trace early. We basically just had to wait for the first wave to be hospitalized and die off (that’s sounds so cold blooded), so the lock downs did what they were supposed to which is to flatten the curve and work toward a vaccine without crashing the health care system. Just my opinion Thanks
 
argh! said:
ranco said:
Interesting article from CNN - regarding Sweden's approach. Pretty apparent the "journalist" could not grasp the actual importance of the story. https://www.cnncreativemarketing.com/project/csr/

Sweden's anti body tests showed that 7.3 % of the population had the virus. The tilt of the article was that Sweden was no where near herd immunity so their approach was flawed.

However, here is the important part from the story:

"Sweden's percentage of people with antibodies is not far off that of other countries that did enforce lockdowns."


The article headline should have been: ENFORCING LOCKDOWNS ONLY HAS MARGINAL BENEFIT

But I guess that wouldn't fit the narrative.
Click to expand...

you gave a link to a video to be shown later. i doubt you watched it.
Click to expand...

I guess my computer skills are lacking. Here is the link or just go to CNN's website:https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/21/health/sweden-herd-immunity-coronavirus-intl/index.html
 
Dutch Lane said:
ranco said:
Interesting article from CNN - regarding Sweden's approach. Pretty apparent the "journalist" could not grasp the actual importance of the story. https://www.cnncreativemarketing.com/project/csr/

Sweden's anti body tests showed that 7.3 % of the population had the virus. The tilt of the article was that Sweden was no where near herd immunity so their approach was flawed.

However, here is the important part from the story:

"Sweden's percentage of people with antibodies is not far off that of other countries that did enforce lockdowns."


The article headline should have been: ENFORCING LOCKDOWNS ONLY HAS MARGINAL BENEFIT

But I guess that wouldn't fit the narrative.
Click to expand...

Dude your conflating Sweden to us. [#]f### it’s one of the fittest, healthiest and laid back stress free place on the planet. There people are well taken care of for the good of the society as a whole not just the wealthy oligarchs who can jet away for an island to endure the pandemic. Also it’s a nation state with centralized government and it’s is mapped out for emergency’s better then we are and there really isn’t much dissent because there ethos is more socialistic then ours when it comes to wealth, health and overall general welfare. Our unhealthy and old are going to be getting hammered and there’s something like close to 50 % with underlying health problems unlike Sweden.

Also the numbers you quote don’t sound good when you look at it something like an economy of scale wise. Sweden has 11 million and 7% with antibodies is like 770,000. For then to get to herd immunity of say 60-70 percent it’s like 7 million. so for US to get to 7% we would have to be at like 2.1 million now. Hope math is right. To get to herd immunity we will take something like 60-70 percent infections or something like 200,000,000 with antibodies. Math? And then try and calculate the slower rate it will take to spread like that across a country a gazillion times bigger then Sweden. And along the way how many people will die after getting it as we reach herd immunity it’s got to be huge i would think. And right now the US numbers are like 94,000 dead and 1.5 million. So if we have to reach 200,000,00 what would we lose to get there like somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 for every 2 million that’s like what 1million dead. That’s a lot dude. We lost 57,000 in the nam and that was over 8-9 years. Maybe this will be the reverse of the 60s and the old will March on Washington and take over public buildings and protest at the conventions to get better protection. Lol. I think the lock down was necessary because we had no testing to be able to identify, contain and trace early. We basically just had to wait for the first wave to be hospitalized and die off (that’s sounds so cold blooded), so the lock downs did what they were supposed to which is to flatten the curve and work toward a vaccine without crashing the health care system. Just my opinion Thanks
Click to expand...

Dude, you too missed the point. The point is whether lockdowns are effective. The story cited to studies showing that enforcing lockdowns had little benefit. Sweden, without lockdowns, had a 7.5 % infection rate. Spain, with extensive lockdowns, had a 5% infection rate, which indicates little benefit from lockdowns. The fact is, with reasonable social distancing and group gathering restrictions, there is no need to lockdown.
 
Dutch Lane said:
ranco said:
Interesting article from CNN - regarding Sweden's approach. Pretty apparent the "journalist" could not grasp the actual importance of the story. https://www.cnncreativemarketing.com/project/csr/

Sweden's anti body tests showed that 7.3 % of the population had the virus. The tilt of the article was that Sweden was no where near herd immunity so their approach was flawed.

However, here is the important part from the story:

"Sweden's percentage of people with antibodies is not far off that of other countries that did enforce lockdowns."


The article headline should have been: ENFORCING LOCKDOWNS ONLY HAS MARGINAL BENEFIT

But I guess that wouldn't fit the narrative.
Click to expand...

Dude your conflating Sweden to us. [#]f### it’s one of the fittest, healthiest and laid back stress free place on the planet. There people are well taken care of for the good of the society as a whole not just the wealthy oligarchs who can jet away for an island to endure the pandemic. Also it’s a nation state with centralized government and it’s is mapped out for emergency’s better then we are and there really isn’t much dissent because there ethos is more socialistic then ours when it comes to wealth, health and overall general welfare. Our unhealthy and old are going to be getting hammered and there’s something like close to 50 % with underlying health problems unlike Sweden.

Also the numbers you quote don’t sound good when you look at it something like an economy of scale wise. Sweden has 11 million and 7% with antibodies is like 770,000. For then to get to herd immunity of say 60-70 percent it’s like 7 million. so for US to get to 7% we would have to be at like 2.1 million now. Hope math is right. To get to herd immunity we will take something like 60-70 percent infections or something like 200,000,000 with antibodies. Math? And then try and calculate the slower rate it will take to spread like that across a country a gazillion times bigger then Sweden. And along the way how many people will die after getting it as we reach herd immunity it’s got to be huge i would think. And right now the US numbers are like 94,000 dead and 1.5 million. So if we have to reach 200,000,00 what would we lose to get there like somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 for every 2 million that’s like what 1million dead. That’s a lot dude. We lost 57,000 in the nam and that was over 8-9 years. Maybe this will be the reverse of the 60s and the old will March on Washington and take over public buildings and protest at the conventions to get better protection. Lol. I think the lock down was necessary because we had no testing to be able to identify, contain and trace early. We basically just had to wait for the first wave to be hospitalized and die off (that’s sounds so cold blooded), so the lock downs did what they were supposed to which is to flatten the curve and work toward a vaccine without crashing the health care system. Just my opinion Thanks
Ps. I went day drinking at the taproom today so there’s that. :thumb:
Click to expand...
 
Dutch Lane said:
Dutch Lane said:
Dude your conflating Sweden to us. [#]f### it’s one of the fittest, healthiest and laid back stress free place on the planet. There people are well taken care of for the good of the society as a whole not just the wealthy oligarchs who can jet away for an island to endure the pandemic. Also it’s a nation state with centralized government and it’s is mapped out for emergency’s better then we are and there really isn’t much dissent because there ethos is more socialistic then ours when it comes to wealth, health and overall general welfare. Our unhealthy and old are going to be getting hammered and there’s something like close to 50 % with underlying health problems unlike Sweden.

Also the numbers you quote don’t sound good when you look at it something like an economy of scale wise. Sweden has 11 million and 7% with antibodies is like 770,000. For then to get to herd immunity of say 60-70 percent it’s like 7 million. so for US to get to 7% we would have to be at like 2.1 million now. Hope math is right. To get to herd immunity we will take something like 60-70 percent infections or something like 200,000,000 with antibodies. Math? And then try and calculate the slower rate it will take to spread like that across a country a gazillion times bigger then Sweden. And along the way how many people will die after getting it as we reach herd immunity it’s got to be huge i would think. And right now the US numbers are like 94,000 dead and 1.5 million. So if we have to reach 200,000,00 what would we lose to get there like somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 for every 2 million that’s like what 1million dead. That’s a lot dude. We lost 57,000 in the nam and that was over 8-9 years. Maybe this will be the reverse of the 60s and the old will March on Washington and take over public buildings and protest at the conventions to get better protection. Lol. I think the lock down was necessary because we had no testing to be able to identify, contain and trace early. We basically just had to wait for the first wave to be hospitalized and die off (that’s sounds so cold blooded), so the lock downs did what they were supposed to which is to flatten the curve and work toward a vaccine without crashing the health care system. Just my opinion Thanks
Ps. I went day drinking at the taproom today so there’s that. :thumb:
Click to expand...

Think my point was that if we had done what Sweden had done our healthcare system would have crashed. They have a better one which could handle what they did. I believe ours couldn’t have withstood the onslaught. The numbers of icu beds in our country would not it have been enough and the death rate of healthcare workers would have helped crash it. We still have it so we can still move forward but I still think the lockdown was necessary not necessarily mortality wise but to preserve the whole system which would have been worse for the economy going forward. IMO
Click to expand...
 
blackfoot griz said:
Dutch,
When you state that Sweden's healthcare system is better than ours, on what are you basing this claim?
Click to expand...

They have universal healthcare for everyone so the access or coverage is what I mean by better then ours 1) and 2) it is consistently considered a world class healthcare system which translates into them being a more healthy society which affects the general wellbeing of there citizens. Google there healthcare system there are all kinds of articles and studies on it. One metric is its infant mortality is like 2.2 per 100,000 births which is in the top 5-6 in the world. The US is around 50th in the world at 5.5. Behind the likes of Cuba and Greece and a bunch of other 2nd world countries. We are the richest country in the world and that’s the best we can do. So yeah imo. I’m thinking there is no way Obamacare gets ruled out by the Supreme Court especially now. Thanks

Ps. Your post after the cat griz game of the bear getting hit in the nads is one of the funniest things I seen posted here. Every male mammal in a 100 mile radius felt that. :cry: :lol: :thumb:
 
argh! said:
PlayerRep said:
Interesting article. Must read.

My view is the practice should be stopped and is neither constitutional or necessary or very helpful.
Click to expand...

agree, that's got to be a violation of the constitution.
Click to expand...

Curious times in which we live to be sure.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/maryland-contact-tracing-anne-arundel/2020/05/21/0f99bcf6-900e-11ea-9e23-6914ee410a5f_story.html

The two articles bother me very much. The second one in that there's a tremendous amount of effort being expended unnecessarily because we already have excellent capabilities we all know are already being utilized for contact tracing. Let the telecommunications industry provide a public data base for everyone to readily access. Shit, we put chips in a fucking fish, on elk, and even our damn dogs and nobody bats a fucking eye at the thought a game warden can easily show up at your door (and don't get me started on the entrapment of kids who shoot at a stuffed deer on the side of the road or wasting all that state money trying to bait some young kid working as a bartender by sending other kids out just to see if they'll sell booze to an underage kid when you could pass a law requiring proof of age for every sale of alcohol, even though I do appreciate getting carded...).
 
while the rest of the world deals with the virus, china keeps quietly widening it's dictatorship reach, this time by installing a "national security" law, thereby basically declaring hong kong and macau as regular mainland cities, with all the digital dystopian crap that involves. also, while they didn't set a gdp target for the year, they did increase their military funding by almost 7%, which is of course a low figure and another lie, signaling again that they are going to build their army and continue to threaten to use force, mostly in the south china sea and around taiwan. it isn't this article, but i read another recently saying that nationalism is so rampant in the younger generations that people in their 50's or so who remember the awfulness of the red guard (mostly young people) during the cultural revolution are now calling the young people the pink guard. xi jinping is one power-hungry zealot.

from the south china morning post, no paywall: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3085552/two-sessions-2020-live-national-peoples-congress-gets-under-way
 
taiwan's response of the installing of the 'national security' law for hong kong is awesome. i wish tsai ing-wen was running for president of the u.s.,the last paragraph is the best:

from the article i posted:

Rejection of separatist activities in Taiwan
Li called in his address for the resolute rejection of separatist activities seeking Taiwan's independence, and urged a deepening of ties across the Taiwan Strait towards the goal of peaceful reunification.
His comments came just after Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen's official inauguration for her second term on Wednesday as leader of the democratic island. Beijing has said it will not renounce the use of force to assert its claims of sovereignty.

Tsai's administration has forcefully rejected the “one country, two systems” model of semi-autonomy proposed by Beijing for the island, and has refused to recognise the “1992 consensus”, a political understanding that Tsai's predecessor claimed meant there was only one China, but different interpretations of whether Taipei or Beijing ruled.
Li’s remarks echoed those made in last year’s work report, but left off mention of the “1992 consensus” which was included last year.

Taiwan slams national security legislation for Hong Kong
Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council slammed the proposed national security law for Hong Kong, saying it violated the democratic and human rights of the city's people. It said the legislation would increase dissatisfaction and endanger all people in the city, as well as its status as an international financial centre.
“In a reflection of the CCP's inability to self-reflect, it is blindly ignoring the root of Hong Kong’s instability and blaming it instead on external forces and ‘Hong Kong independence’ forces, and is therefore anxious to legislate to be on guard against any national security loopholes,” the council said in a statement.
“The laws of any civilised country should be the protector of the people, not the shackles of freedom,” it said. “We hope the relevant parties will think twice, and not make the wrong decision, to plunge Hong Kong into further chaos."
 
hokeyfine said:
ilovethecats said:
Hasn't there been violations of the constitution for a couple months now?
Click to expand...
I guess my question would be, if there are violations to the constitution then why haven't lawmakers taken it to court?..... Maybe they have and I haven't seen it.
Click to expand...

A few have. Doubt the suits will have much traction. But some businesses are at least trying to uphold that pesky constitution. We should probably just rewrite that damn thing anyway... ;)

https://reason.com/2020/03/30/this-business-is-suing-the-government-over-a-coronavirus-closure-order/
 
ilovethecats said:
hokeyfine said:
I guess my question would be, if there are violations to the constitution then why haven't lawmakers taken it to court?..... Maybe they have and I haven't seen it.
Click to expand...

A few have. Doubt the suits will have much traction. But some businesses are at least trying to uphold that pesky constitution. We should probably just rewrite that damn thing anyway... ;)

https://reason.com/2020/03/30/this-business-is-suing-the-government-over-a-coronavirus-closure-order/
Click to expand...

Hockey: Legislators rarely bring actions to enforce the Constitution. Suits are brought by plaintiffs lime in the linked situations, and by plaintiffs who are backed by groups that have money and lawyers to fund and push the cases along, and sometimes to the US Supreme Court.
 
Dutch, two questions.

Have you seen any data to suggest that the "bad", i.e. non-universal healthcare systems has caused many virus deaths? I haven't noticed any, nor have I looked.

Note that the virus deaths are mainly older people who are eligible for Medicare. I've read that over 80% of the deaths are for people old enough to be on Medicare. Also, in most but not all states, the level for qualifying for Medicaid is 133% (or 138% now) of federal poverty level. 72.5 million on Medicaid.

One of the big reasons Americans are unhealthy is because alot of people are overweight, or way overweight. Does that have much to do with having healthcare coverage?

If you have data supporting your view that the extent of the virus problem in the US is the result of uneven or non-universal healthcare, bring it to our attention. I'm not looking for people's opinions, I've seen enough of that, I would like to see data or facts.
 
PlayerRep said:
Dutch, two questions.

Have you seen any data to suggest that the "bad", i.e. non-universal healthcare systems has caused many virus deaths? I haven't noticed any, nor have I looked.

Note that the virus deaths are mainly older people who are eligible for Medicare. I've read that over 80% of the deaths are for people old enough to be on Medicare. Also, in most but not all states, the level for qualifying for Medicaid is 133% (or 138% now) of federal poverty level. 72.5 million on Medicaid.

One of the big reasons Americans are unhealthy is because alot of people are overweight, or way overweight. Does that have much to do with having healthcare coverage?

If you have data supporting your view that the extent of the virus problem in the US is the result of uneven or non-universal healthcare, bring it to our attention. I'm not looking for people's opinions, I've seen enough of that, I would like to see data or facts.
Click to expand...

Understand your question was directed toward Ducth, but the countries with the worst death rates (based on deaths per million population) all have "universal heath care."


Rate
Belgium: 795
Spain: 598
Italy: 539
UK: 536
France: 432
Sweden: 389


The US rate is 293

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top