Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

[aparch]

1/3 of what, 2%? That's still close to an order of magnitude worse than influenza.

Also, all of this downplaying of this virus and comparing it to common influenza- I've been around for over 50 years now, and I can't recall anytime in my life time that the common influenza ever overwhelmed multiple hospital systems all over the world at the same time.

So can we stop with that stupid comparison and just get on with what we have here?

<img width=400 src=https://imgur.com/j0CseIs.gif>

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

1/3 of what, 2%? That's still close to an order of magnitude worse than influenza.

Also, all of this downplaying of this virus and comparing it to common influenza- I've been around for over 50 years now, and I can't recall anytime in my life time that the common influenza ever overwhelmed multiple hospital systems all over the world at the same time.

So can we stop with that stupid comparison and just get on with what we have here?

Yeah, their actual number was 0.66%, so between six and seven times as bad as the typical flu, which I think is something like 0.1%.

 

[rufus]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

Yeah, their actual number was 0.66%, so between six and seven times as bad as the typical flu, which I think is something like 0.1%.

So again, 300,000 makes it ok then. Yay Donnie. You did a great job. Could have been 2 million if you hadn't done anything.

Oh wait, you didn't want to do anything. It's the governors who stepped up while you sat on your fat azz.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

you can't really use the % testing positive now to extrapolate the total population that eventually becomes infected. Some of those testing negative now can and will become infected later.

I know...it was just a mental exercise for me not some scientific action.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

There was a study reported in The Lancet a day or two ago that suggested the death rate may be only a third of that, for what it's worth. I know Handy won't like it because it references the Diamond Princess.

Is it from the same clown who has been proven wrong twice now?

I dont have an issue with the Diamond Princess as a data point...that someone who is published and respected spreads misinformation and blames the media is what bugs me. That guy is a clown.

 

[aparch]

Yeah, their actual number was 0.66%, so between six and seven times as bad as the typical flu, which I think is something like 0.1%.

That's the cumulative % for all age groups, correct? I thought I saw on Twitter early this morning that despite the flu being deadly in the elderly, this coronavirus just wallops the olds like no other virus.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

Is it from the same clown who has been proven wrong twice now?

I dont have an issue with the Diamond Princess as a data point...that someone who is published and respected spreads misinformation and blames the media is what bugs me. That guy is a clown.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30243-7/fulltext

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

Is it from the same clown who has been proven wrong twice now?

I dont have an issue with the Diamond Princess as a data point...that someone who is published and respected spreads misinformation and blames the media is what bugs me. That guy is a clown.

The Lancet is pretty dang good as far as medical journals* go... I think you're confusing him with the guy destroyed in the New Yorker interview with Isaac Chotiner

Edit: *As far as any publication goes for that matter.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

There was a study reported in The Lancet a day or two ago that suggested the death rate may be only a third of that, for what it's worth.

Well if true it will be worth 800,000 lives, so I really hope so.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

CH2M Hill? Those bunch of fu** ups couldn't even get sh** to flow downhill in Chicago*, I doubt they could even draw a biological super weapon with a box of crayons and a coloring book of germs, let alone create one.

I changed it to Battelle after I read up a bit. It looks like CH2M Hill is just Halliburton only even more incompetent.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

If it's a celebrity that's one thing. Anybody who takes a celebrity seriously on matters of public policy is begging for Darwin for breakfast.

When you cited "public figures" and "media" I was thinking it was reporters, analysts, or staffers. That would be 1000x worse since those people ought to know better and are serving something larger than their own Q score.

Ok you need to really learn what Twitter is or just stop commenting on it. This is like explaining the internet to my grandparents

Here let me break it down for you:

Following John Cusack is a way to get a look at what both the "BeRnIe or DIE!!!!" crowd believes AND the legitimate mouthpieces and media types that support Bernie think. If you follow him he often retweets them. As such anyone who follows him (or follows someone who follows him or whoever else the algorithm decides) sees this. Now the people he is often retweeting on these matters are people like say Mehdi Hasan, Krystal Ball (who I havent seen comment on this), Peter Daou amongst others who are politicians, activists and media types for various print, online and TV sources. They say it, he retweets it and so on. I use him because he is a good example but honestly I bet if you just followed Krystal Ball or The Hill you would see most of it. The movement to destroy Biden because Bernie cant win legitimately is Putin-esque in its efficiency. (no I am not saying Putin has anything to do with it)

Now, if it was being only disseminated to the Berners I wouldnt much care. They would see it and create their bubble and we could ignoreit. The problem is many of these people are followed and follow more mainstream types. As such this stuff doesnt stay in the Berner bubble but goes viral. Twitter makes sure of it. That is why I see some nutjob Righties despite not following anyone of that ilk. I might follow someone who has retweeted James Woods defending Glenn Beck or something and there we go. (that is why The White House and President always end up in my feed)

tl;dr: John Cusack is just the guy that gives us the glimpse. There are dozens of media, politicians and activists out there using their cache and thousands of followers to try and tear the Democrats apart right now.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

The Lancet is pretty dang good as far as medical journals* go... I think you're confusing him with the guy destroyed in the New Yorker interview with Isaac Chotiner

Edit: *As far as any publication goes for that matter.

Lancet is the best. I’ve lived off that for grad school

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">As the virus spread throughout the U.S., Trump was so distracted by impeachment that he held six campaign rallies and played golf at his West Palm Beach property on three separate occasions. <a href="https://t.co/k8ysIpNVZg">https://t.co/k8ysIpNVZg</a></p>— Robert Reich (@RBReich) <a href="https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1245091578667888640?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 31, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Handyman]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

The Lancet is pretty dang good as far as medical journals* go... I think you're confusing him with the guy destroyed in the New Yorker interview with Isaac Chotiner

Edit: *As far as any publication goes for that matter.

I wasnt talking about The Lancet...I was talking about the Nobel Laureate from Stanford the RWNJ rolled out to blame the Left Media and used China and Diamond Princess to prove that the numbers werent as bad as expected and blah blah blah. (without acknowledging the flaws in the argument or data AT ALL) The Lancet is fine, he was irresponsible and his conclusions were ridiculous. I missed SJHovey said Lancet I read too fast based on seeing Diamond Princess

(Lancet is not downplaying this at all and their numbers seem on par with what I read last week)

edit: Close to 3800 dead according to Worldometers

 

[Kepler]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

Ok you need to really learn what Twitter is or just stop commenting on it. This is like explaining the internet to my grandparents

Here let me break it down for you:

Following John Cusack is a way to get a look at what both the "BeRnIe or DIE!!!!" crowd believes AND the legitimate mouthpieces and media types that support Bernie think. If you follow him he often retweets them. As such anyone who follows him (or follows someone who follows him or whoever else the algorithm decides) sees this. Now the people he is often retweeting on these matters are people like say Mehdi Hasan, Krystal Ball (who I havent seen comment on this), Peter Daou amongst others who are politicians, activists and media types for various print, online and TV sources. They say it, he retweets it and so on. I use him because he is a good example but honestly I bet if you just followed Krystal Ball or The Hill you would see most of it. The movement to destroy Biden because Bernie cant win legitimately is Putin-esque in its efficiency. (no I am not saying Putin has anything to do with it)

Now, if it was being only disseminated to the Berners I wouldnt much care. They would see it and create their bubble and we could ignore it. The problem is many of these people are followed and follow more mainstream types. As such this stuff doesnt stay in the Berner bubble but goes viral. Twitter makes sure of it. That is why I see some nutjob Righties despite not following anyone of that ilk. I might follow someone who has retweeted James Woods defending Glenn Beck or something and there we go. (that is why The White House and President always end up in my feed)

tl;dr: John Cusack is just the guy that gives us the glimpse. There are dozens of media, politicians and activists out there using their cache and thousands of followers to try and tear the Democrats apart right now.

I get all that. My point is all of that exists in an entertainment information economy, like Fox News. Yes, the morons are taken in, but I'm predicating this by restricting the scope of the human beings to be considered to likely Democratic voters. I am presuming -- you can correct me if I'm wrong -- that those people are intelligent enough that they are hate-reading / hate-retweeting that garbage. Yes, Republicans and similar mental deficients fall for internet memes, like they fall for advertising. And many, many people use this as a junk food entertainment / irritainment option. But nobody with even a B student's brain is going to fall for it in real life.

I think you're falling for the narrative that says this is going to make an impact on sentient beings. A narrative that is itself generated by social media to exaggerate its importance and drive people back to it.

What I'm saying is, as dumb as the majority of people, even Democrats, are, they aren't dumber than that. People can watch garbage teevee or retweet garbage tweets without becoming acolytes. These people figure out their mortgages and their insurance and can tie their shoes. They aren't righties. They have opposable thumbs.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

Some might be, but not as much as you might think. Many of these people ARE acolytes because they still say "Only Bernie Can Win". And they arent saying it because it makes them money or gives them cache...they are true believers. They friggin spam over it and get their followers to do the same.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

Some might be, but not as much as you might think. Many of these people ARE acolytes because they still say "Only Bernie Can Win". And they arent saying it because it makes them money or gives them cache...they are true believers. They friggin spam over it and get their followers to do the same.

My bottom line advice is: turn it off. There is no way to win a mudslinging contest with pigs. Kill your Facebook and kill your Twitter and volunteer in your community and canvass house to house and show people Democrats are sane and healthy and competent, and they will vote for us. Many more people are uninformed than evil. We can make the difference person-to-person.

Mass social media is a waste of energy and a character killer. It is the Apotheosis of Capitalism: commodifying and cheapening us.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

I wasnt talking about The Lancet...I was talking about the Nobel Laureate from Stanford the RWNJ rolled out to blame the Left Media and used China and Diamond Princess to prove that the numbers werent as bad as expected and blah blah blah. (without acknowledging the flaws in the argument or data AT ALL) The Lancet is fine, he was irresponsible and his conclusions were ridiculous. I missed SJHovey said Lancet I read too fast based on seeing Diamond Princess

(Lancet is not downplaying this at all and their numbers seem on par with what I read last week)

edit: Close to 3800 dead according to Worldometers

I might just start inserting Diamond Princess in all my posts to see how much distraction I can cause you.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Covfefe-19 part 6: Waiting For Advice from Kid Rock and Tiger Woods now.

I wasnt talking about The Lancet...I was talking about the Nobel Laureate from Stanford the RWNJ rolled out to blame the Left Media and used China and Diamond Princess to prove that the numbers werent as bad as expected and blah blah blah. (without acknowledging the flaws in the argument or data AT ALL) The Lancet is fine, he was irresponsible and his conclusions were ridiculous. I missed SJHovey said Lancet I read too fast based on seeing Diamond Princess

(Lancet is not downplaying this at all and their numbers seem on par with what I read last week)

edit: Close to 3800 dead according to Worldometers

Honestly, I wish we wouldn't treat Nobel laureates as some sort of beacons of expertise every time they open their mouth. They're experts in the field they earned the Nobel in. I really don't have much use for a winner in literature opining on financial markets or anything else for that matter. Unless of course they just happened to be an expert in the financial markets and wrote a Nobel-worthy novel as a side hustle.

Either way, I've really learned to tune out any story that starts with "Nobel Laureate Says..."

Same thing goes for any story that leads with "Professor at <University> Says..." especially the Ivies, Stanford, MIT, etc. Great. Unless it's "Professor of Epidemiology at <University> Says <something> About COVID-19" shut the **** up. You might was well as be ****-posting on USCHO like the rest of us.

 

[BassAle]

I saw a statistic that a new virus' first wave burns out when 80% of the population has been exposed. I'm assuming:

80% exposed
20% of exposed infected
02% of infected dead

For the world:
9 billion population
7.2 billion exposed
1.4 billion infected
29 million dead

For the US:
330 million population
264 million exposed
53 million infected
1.1 million dead

For comparison, the CDC estimated 38-54M flu illnesses this season, so down to the level of infection the numbers check. The trick is to keep the number of deaths closer to what it is for the flu (60,000) than it would be if we had absolutely no immunity or vaccine (a brand new virus).

Why would only 20% of those exposed become infected when no one has any immunity? That seems low.