Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Covfefe-19 The 12th Part: The Only Thing Worse Than This New Board Is TrumpVirus2020

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1299633158497935360?s=19

    Replies are "fun" and sad.
    "If you leave ignorance and stupidity alone, ignorance and stupidity will think it's ok."
    -Gallagher

    R.I.P.
    Grandpa G. ~ Feb 11, 1918-Oct. 6, 1999
    Grandma ~ Jan 2004
    Dad ~ Nov. 4, 1958-April 21, 2008
    Grandpa S. ~ June 21, 1932-November 11, 2013

    SCSU 2015-16 scoring by class through 40 games
    Seniors: 210 points (71G, 139A) from 5 players
    Juniors: 39 points (8G, 31A) from 4 players
    Sophomores: 99 points (49G, 50A) from 5 players
    Freshmen: 129 points (43G, 86A) from 8 players

    Comment


    • Originally posted by WisconsinWildcard View Post
      I think one of my favorite part of the idiots talking points is the assumption of average life expectancy. It really helps weed out the morons though.

      If someone is 84...their life expectancy is not 77. Life expectancy changes as you age. It is like they do not understand actuarial science or insurance at all.

      ****ing embarrassing
      Life expectancy is a measure, Cupcake. It helps to provide context. The measures #TeamHysteria take to ensure there is no perspective or context and that it is just very, very, very scary is pathetic.


      Don't let information send you to your Safe Space. Save it for more trying times.

      https://mobile.twitter.com/covid_cla...15451378696192

      With 70,000+ infected people studied in MN…
      > There are more deaths age 90+ than age 70 and below
      > 99.9% covid survival outside long term care
      > 99.97% covid survival for ages under 60
      > Avg age of death is 6 yrs beyond life expectancy

      Last edited by Jeb2020; 08-29-2020, 12:22 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Slap Shot View Post
        jfc - the latest social media claim is you're more likely to die from a lightning strike than Covid. While this may be technically true (estimated 2.5%) lighting strikes kill as many as 6,000 people annually. The level of stupidity that permeates society is astounding.
        A large percentage of the populace believes that 9% of the country has died from Covid. So you are definitely on the right track about, astounding stupidity.

        https://www.franklintempletonnordic....m-science.html

        Six months into this pandemic, Americans still dramatically misunderstand the risk of dying from COVID-19:
        1. On average, Americans believe that people aged 55 and older account for just over half of total COVID-19 deaths; the actual figure is 92%.
        2. Americans believe that people aged 44 and younger account for about 30% of total deaths; the actual figure is 2.7%.
        3. Americans overestimate the risk of death from COVID-19 for people aged 24 and younger
        4. by a factor of 50; and they think the risk for people aged 65 and older is half of what it actually is (40% vs 80%).

        These results are nothing short of stunning. Mortality data have shown from the very beginning that the COVID-19 virus age-discriminates, with deaths overwhelmingly concentrated in people who are older and suffer comorbidities. This is perhaps the only uncontroversial piece of evidence we have about this virus. Nearly all US fatalities have been among people older than 55; and yet a large number of Americans are still convinced that the risk to those younger than 55 is almost the same as to those who are older.
        Last edited by Jeb2020; 08-29-2020, 10:59 AM.

        Comment


        • https://twitter.com/jhaskinscabrera/...49789401837569

          This is very important: Not only is COVID significantly less deadly to the elderly if they're not in LTC, but it's also significantly less deadly to those in assisted living. The vulnerable are those we would expect: those frail enough to be in skilled nursing care.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by First Time, Long Time View Post
            jfc the replies make me weep.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by net presence View Post



              https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/o...ent-death.html


              So, the experts -- virus and economic -- are saying we didn't lockdown strictly or long enough.
              Olsterholm is an epidemiologist. He is not an expert in modeling, he is not an expert in applying modeling to real world decisions (the two are two very different things), and he isn't an expert in lockdowns as they have never been attempted like this in anyone's lifetime. The predictions Olsterholm has made since March based on extremely flawed models have been epically wrong.

              The false positives alone would ensure the parameters that were laid out would never be met. The insanity could literally go on forever.

              Also, they are relying on "modeling" still, modeling that was so absurdly wrong which led to the hysteria in the first place. They should be relying on the massive amounts of real world data that is now available.

              Not once in the article do they mention the consequences of lockdowns. That was actually a very awful article to base your argument on.

              The world's toughest lockdown has resulted in the world's highest COVID-19 death toll

              https://jordanschachtel.substack.com...t-lockdown-hashttps://jordanschachtel.substack.com...t-lockdown-has


              The lockdown has been a catastrophe

              https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/0...a-catastrophe/

              Israel has had one of the stricktest lockdowns in the world.




              NONE OF THIS IS NORMAL. None of this should be viewed as anything but the ultimate temporary stopgap, to be undone as soon as possible. The burden is on those who would lock us down, not the other way around. Please don’t let anyone convince you otherwise.
              Last edited by Jeb2020; 08-29-2020, 10:53 AM.

              Comment


              • Roll tide!

                https://mobile.twitter.com/DKThomp/s...10472200097792

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Deutsche Gopher Fan View Post
                  ^^


                  First off, you don't test positive for Covid-19.

                  Another 481 COVID-19 cases found at University of Alabama


                  Second off, lmao
                  The additional 481 cases on the Tuscaloosa campus were reported between Aug. 25 and Aug. 27. The university system said no students are hospitalized.

                  Thirdly, one more for good measure. lmao

                  It went from “flatten the curve and space out infections so the healthcare system isn’t overwhelmed” to “one new infection makes the news and means we need to shut everything down again.” And so often that "case" is asymptomatic and most likely not an active infection. This is the panic now.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by WisconsinWildcard View Post
                    I think one of my favorite part of the idiots talking points is the assumption of average life expectancy. It really helps weed out the morons though.

                    If someone is 84...their life expectancy is not 77. Life expectancy changes as you age. It is like they do not understand actuarial science or insurance at all.

                    ****ing embarrassing
                    Disingenuous bullcrap conflation, but not surprising, given the forum. It's really not that difficult. When the phrase "beyond life expectancy" is used, it doesn't mean life expectancy in the moment. It means the average life expectancy for a person born at a certain time (usually by year). For example, if a person born in 1937 on average has a 77 year life expectancy, and passes away at age 83 in 2020, it means they have lived "beyond life expectancy". Not at all complicated now, is it?

                    But if you want to conflate life expectancy in the moment then no one - NO ONE - would ever live "beyond life expectancy" because even if you manage to make it to 100 years old, you will still have a year or two life expectancy looking forward.

                    Two separate concepts. So either you're intentionally conflating the two, or you're thick as a brick.

                    Effing embarrassing indeed, eh Skippy ...
                    Sworn Enemy of the Perpetually Offended
                    Montreal Expos Forever ...

                    Comment


                    • No one knows life expectancy like an insurance salesman.
                      What kind of cheese are you planning to put on top?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Chuck Murray View Post

                        Disingenuous bullcrap conflation, but not surprising, given the forum. It's really not that difficult. When the phrase "beyond life expectancy" is used, it doesn't mean life expectancy in the moment. It means the average life expectancy for a person born at a certain time (usually by year). For example, if a person born in 1937 on average has a 77 year life expectancy, and passes away at age 83 in 2020, it means they have lived "beyond life expectancy". Not at all complicated now, is it?

                        But if you want to conflate life expectancy in the moment then no one - NO ONE - would ever live "beyond life expectancy" because even if you manage to make it to 100 years old, you will still have a year or two life expectancy looking forward.

                        Two separate concepts. So either you're intentionally conflating the two, or you're thick as a brick.

                        Effing embarrassing indeed, eh Skippy ...
                        Way to remove all doubt.

                        Comment


                        • Lol, Chucky arguing with an actual physician on medical definitions.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by FadeToBlack&Gold View Post
                            Lol, Chucky arguing with an actual physician on medical definitions.
                            I also liked when flaggy said that osterholm doesn’t know how to run models. Funny I remember models in multiple languages being hammered at me until it became second nature while studying epi much less osterholm lol

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by FadeToBlack&Gold View Post
                              Lol, Chucky arguing with an actual physician on medical definitions.
                              It is really, really, really, really Scary. (Les did I get in enough really's in there?).

                              The virus that no one would know existed if it wasn't on loop 24/7.

                              Really and I mean really scary.

                              Comment


                              • They can take our lives... but they'll never take... our FANTASY FOOTBALL!!!
                                Huskies are very intelligent and trainable. Huskies make an excellent jogging companion, as long as it is not too hot. Grooming is minimal; bathing is normally unnecessary.
                                USCHO Fantasy Baseball Champion 2011 2013 2015

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X