Do you believe people should follow science during this?
It’s a sad, but all too common story. According to data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, of US adults who were hospitalized for influenza infection in 2018-2019 with additional information available, 93 percent had at least one underlying medical condition. Despite overwhelming evidence of the benefits of annual flu vaccination, vaccination rates remain well below the Healthy People 2020 targets, leaving a significant portion of the population vulnerable.
Strange the comparisons to Spanish flu due to the completely different demographic that was at risk.
Tbh outside of the Christopher Walken scene I don’t understand the appeal of True Romance. Its a mediocre movie ignoring that scene.
And I said, we will get to a pretty close number, because we know about how statistics and probability work. I then used some standard statistics terms, and said that you appear not to understand them.
You turn around and post this, proving you don't.
If you want to take that position, you are saying that we can't use statistics to analyse the situation.
So what other proposed explanation do you have for the uptick in the death rate?
Be sure to show your work and link to some information that forms the basis of your answer.
Never grows old, mono.
.0066 is the best information we have now as to the actual rate. (from a scientific paper done on fully tested populations at the beginning of the outbbreak) Your math is correct, but your reasoning is not.
To get the actual fatality, we would have to have much better testing, which we do not.
Walk through this exercise:
How many people have the disease or have had the disease. How many of them have been tested, and confirmed? Since we have run so few tests, it stands to reason that the case number should be much higher.
Therefore the only thing we can know about the US data set is that the death rate is LOWER than 6.4%.
The problem is that the disease really isn't likely getting more deadly. Therefore as the death/case ratio gets higher, it indicates that many more people have the disease than we know and it is more widespread than we thought.
That will catch up to us.
"They" being the made up people in your mind. This is what is known as a "Strawman".
Feel free to point to a real statement by a real person.
Just put the pieces together, Dale.
Was the pilot drunk? Drugged? Acting on his own?Vanessa Bryant says heavy fog and low clouds prompted law enforcement agencies and tour companies to ground their helicopters, but the pilot flying Kobe and Gianna requested special clearance from air traffic control to keep flying
No? Hmmm. So why was he risking life and limb when nobody else was flying? Does it cross your mind for a second that an egomaniac and narcissist like Kirby was not the "special clearance" behind this whole mess?The pilot of the helicopter that crashed in January killing Kobe Bryant and others had no alcohol or drugs in his system that day, an autopsy report shows
Just admit it, the Count bumps stop.
Last edited by Splits; 05-17-2020 at 02:20 PM.
Pretty close = exact to you. Got it
straw man
You're really emotional when asked directly to explain anything. You obviously can't discuss anything.
I'm still waiting for you to explain how a person who dies from alcohol poisoning is included in the science you believe in....
You're really emotional when asked directly to explain anything. You obviously can't discuss anything.
I'm still waiting for you to explain how the virus is spread from days ago. You're far too emotional to answer. I understand. You've been rendered a blubbering mess on this board. You know there's no coming back from your embarrassment so you have to keep changing the subject and making straw men to soothe yourself.
You can't even attempt to explain how the virus is spread and all you do here is try to convince yourself you're smart. Why should anyone take you seriously?
...I'd rather be stripped down naked & beaten with a hickory switch.
"The card says moops."
"pretty close" is not exact. No. But if "pretty close" is almost certainly close enough to exact to still draw meaningful conclusions, and formulate good policy, what is the difference?
I'm still waiting for you to explain the sudden massive uptick in the death rate for non-confirmed COVID causes.
Has there been a sustained hurricane or something I am not aware of? Some floods maybe? Some giant natural disaster that just happened to coincide with a pandemic?
I appreciate you admitting you were wrong in the previous post.
Hmmm maybe it could be that sick people stayed home instead of getting treatment for other disease since they were told by the government to stay out of the over capacity hospitals that never happened.
Your turn. Tell me more about the cdc stat padding?
This is exactly the reason you will never know. The cdc doesn't know the exact count of flu deaths every year, why do you think they would suddenly have 100 percent actual covid death?
It's sad because they say trust the science, but they don't have accurate data. Probably will make people less trusting of science or vaccination. Which is not good.
They also say the spanish flu is comparable when it is not.
I believe people should use science to help make policy.
I understand the consequences of shutting down an economy.
Science should not involve politics. people who do science are going to be political just like anyone else but the process itself can’t be political and if it is, then it’s just not usable.
Science is a very narrow human activity.
It tries to give us the most likely answers to very narrow questions that must be refutable.
Update (17 May 2020):::
Trump's Corona Plague dead: 90,973
Regular Flu dead: 23+k
Spanish Flu dead: 275k
Obama's H1N1 Flu dead: 12.5k
Let us proceed...
Get in here Thread, it's dinner time and sandwiches are on the menu.
Can't ya slack off just one day?
Agreed.
Why do you think the cdc is comparing the spanish flu to covid if the demos are different?
How can you trust the cdc death count if they are obviously increasing the covid count?
Don't you find it odd the believe the science rhetoric when the numbers are not accurate?
I don't know the consequences of shutting down the economy. But its absurd for people to be so staunch in their opinion that shutting down the economy and ruining over 30 million peoples lives for "saving" a hypothetical amount of lives.
Is the cost of saving one life a fair trade to ruin another? What about if that person who lost their job has 2 kids. Is one life, who has already had their chance to live, worth ruining 3?
Would not want to be the person that had to make the choice, obviously a no win. This is why it shouldn't be political. The people who blame on one person are not in it for the greater good
You can't. They sold their soul to politics and now they can't get back in the public trust. I've no sympathy for them or WHO.
Their regrets are their own.
Like the last time you saw the playoffs.. that woodshed still reeks of tears and .
now you are entering the realm of statistics and gathering data
my personal feeling is we are most likely under accounting due to the fact that people are dying at home. there are so many pre-existing conditions that can manifest themselves in death due to this virus I don’t know how to get an accurate count.
but if anything I believe it’s under counted
This is bull . We might be undercounting but intentionally over counting to make up for an assumption is stupid.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote