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

[rufus]

No one knows life expectancy like an insurance salesman.

[Slap Shot]

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.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

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

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

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

[Jeb2020]

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.

[geezer]

They can take our lives... but they'll never take... our FANTASY FOOTBALL!!!

[Jeb2020]

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

Really solid argument you have made here. Really clears a lot up, the Models that were created for MN that they are basing decisions on must be iron clad...

MN was going to be at 30,000 deaths in August! lmao, lmfao.

https://twitter.com/covid_clarity/st...24804099489793

The Minnesota covid model #MNmodel forecasts 29,000 deaths. What’s causing these high estimates? Click HERE… for a DEEP DIVE THREAD that explains it.



More LMFAO
7/ It doesn’t take into account the possibility that some groups may be more vulnerable to infection. The #MNmodel treats a 14 year-old healthy teenager & a 90 year-old in a nursing home as equally susceptible to becoming infected.

This is on par with Neil Ferguson level, awful modeling.

[Kepler]

Way to remove all doubt.

Golf clap.

[leswp1]

They can take our lives... but they'll never take... our FANTASY FOOTBALL!!!

THis provided a much needed laugh.

The saga of does my kid go be an RA at college is a soap opera. The kid backed out and resigned. With in the last couple of days a number of the RAs tested positive but they decided return was still OK. Message today- 4 of the 6 heads RA's, an RD, AC, assistant director, and several RA's all walked out. Hoo nelly!

[net presence]

Mr. 1820.... Seriously, you need to go back and take a remedial reading class. Either that or you didn't actually read it. Please see the following from the Op Ed:

"The problem with the March-to-May lockdown was that it was not uniformly stringent across the country. For example, Minnesota deemed 78 percent of its workers essential. To be effective, the lockdown has to be as comprehensive and strict as possible."

Please see the following paragraph, sure looks to me like they addressed the consequences of lockdowns...

"We know that a stringent lockdown can have serious health consequences for patients who can’t get access to routine care. But over the past six months, medical professionals have learned how to protect patients and staffs from spreading the coronavirus; therefore we should be able to maintain access to regular medical care during any new lockdown."

Also, I guarantee you he's familiar with modeling as an epidemiologist. And, your claim that all the modeling was absurd is just patently false. In fact, some of the models predicting how many deaths we would have come August, were actually lower than what actually occurred. Also, your claim that the type of lockdown Osterholm is suggesting have never occurred in anyone's lifetime, is so ignorant of the facts it's laughable. He explains in the piece how numerous other countries enacted the exact same level of lockdown he's suggesting. In fact, despite saying we've never seen a lockdown of that type in our lifetime, you then contradict yourself and link to an article that talks about how ineffective the stringent lockdown in Peru was. You also seem to ignore the fact it was co-authored by the president of the Minneapolis Fed. You really need to get off whatever drugs you're on.

[net presence]

1820....What the hell do mean by saying, "you don't test positive for Covid-19"? That's literally contrary to what EVERY person in the medical community world wide says about a positive test.

Also, in regards to "And so often that "case" is asymptomatic and most likely not an active infection." Take a look at this;

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53946420

From the article...

"The study, based on 91 children, found that even among those with few or no symptoms, virus could be found in their swabs as much as three weeks later.
The fact they had detectable virus in their noses, the authors concluded, suggested they were capable of passing it on. The study was therefore able to give us some new information about children as carriers of the virus, and their potential capacity to be spreading it onwards."

"Logic dictates that in both children and adults, people with no or few symptoms - who aren't coughing and projecting the virus into the air - are likely to be less infectious, and children generally get milder cases of the disease. But significant numbers of asymptomatic people could still have a noticeable effect on the infection rate."

"Dr DeBiasi believes that while the "vast majority of infected children have mild or unrecognised disease," they may play an "important" role in enabling the spread of infection through communities.

But hey 1820, you and Chuck keep spouting your inaccurate garbage. You both continue to prove your lack of intelligence with every post you make.

[Chuck Murray]

No one knows life expectancy like an insurance salesman.

Way to remove all doubt.

Don't mention it, guys.

Here to help fill in some of the gaping holes in the Lounge's collective knowledge.

For example ...

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

"Life expectancy" is a statistical (actuarlal) analysis - NOT a "medical definition", Gomer ...

[WisconsinWildcard]

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 ...

Chuck...I was not conflating ****. I was simply commenting on much of the stupidity on downplaying deaths in those over age 77 since they lived "beyond life expectancy" that is quite prevalent.

I understand the terms quite well and actually do something every day to try to increase the average life expectancy. But thanks for the huffy lecture!

[Handyman]

Come on...what are the chances you know more than he does? I mean sure you went to school and stuff but he stayed at a Holiday in Montreal once so he obviously knows more!!

[Jeb2020]

Chuck...I was not conflating ****. I was simply commenting on much of the stupidity on downplaying deaths in those over age 77 since they lived "beyond life expectancy" that is quite prevalent.

I understand the terms quite well and actually do something every day to try to increase the average life expectancy. But thanks for the huffy lecture!

Actually I was downplaying the absurdity of posting about a single "positive case." Then I posted actual factual information about the State of MN. And your initial response tried to get me on some sort of technicality about Life Expectancy not down playing deaths. Chasing your tail a bit WildCard.

Originally posted by Drew S. View Post
My wife just heard a school district near Les(not sure exactly what town she’s in) went back Wednesday and they’ve already had someone test positive. They’ve now shut it completely down and are going online. How can people expect anything else?

^^#TeamAppocalypse

Sounds really, really Scary. I mean really.

Back in reality.

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



Do Better WisconsinWildCard.