rufus
rock and roller
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Way to not answer the question. Pretty much expected of a fukwit troll.
Way to not answer the question. Pretty much expected of a fukwit troll.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
COVID-19 - Part 2
- Thread starter Chuck Murray
- Start date
- Status
rufus
rock and roller
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
https://bing.com/covid/local/unitedstates?form=msntrk
And?
Few more days, and we'll be having a 9/11 every day. Be proud, Trumpers.
https://bing.com/covid/local/unitedstates?form=msntrk
And?
Few more days, and we'll be having a 9/11 every day. Be proud, Trumpers.
dontstayathome
New member
9/11. Pearl Harbor. Stop watching CNN. You have a .002% chance of dying from the Chinese virus.
dontstayathome
New member
Actually the data is manipulated. So u prolly have a far less chance. Especially if you’re under 70
12275~327million=.0000375% chance.
Last edited:
French Rage
NICKERSON HAS [CENSORED]
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Welcome back BlackI.
Welcome back BlackI.
net presence
Active member
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Hey Chuck, great to see you're still out there my friend! Despite your claim, I'm not a "new guy". Again, as I stated in my original post in this thread, I've been around for 15 years. Just haven't ever posted in non-hockey topics. Also, not trying to "bait you", simply surprised that you aren't willing to engage in an honest debate about the various claims/conservative talking points you've made from the start of the first Covid thread. Still no response though eh? Oh well, I'll just continue to chime in on your future posts if I feel you're spouting inaccurate info. Funny though, someone comes in and actually challenges you point to point and you choose to slink away to the corner. I have found that that's what conservatives/righties tend to do when truly forced to defend their talking points. Especially when the actual real FACTS legitimately prove their statements simply aren't true. That or they start to name call and attack someone personally. It's obvious you generally don't do the latter which, you are to be commended for. Stay safe Chuck and I am watching, waiting, and willing to chime in.
Not me, 'watcher - and I hate to dispel an old USCHO myth, but Jacques was not me either.
I have a decent guess at who Jacques was/is (?) as that was a creative and funny character. I've probably mentioned to others that I'm pretty sure "Jacques" has made subsequent appearances under other identities. But I don't make a habit of airing my suspicions of personal identities on here, when posters may want to protect that. For example, I have a pretty decent guess at your identity, but I would never, ever post it here. I'm kind of breaking my own rule in even mentioning a suspicion here ... but you can chalk that up to you casting the first stone.
++++++++++
Otherwise, the new guy seems to be out there, spoiling for some showdown (or whatever his comrades have put him up to), kind of pathetic to see his posts whining about how I'm "ignoring" him - forgetting how I left it with him at the end of my one and only response to him. Rolling out the usual crap bait - "he's avoiding me", "he must have nothing", blah blah blah, etc. As if he's got something compelling to say, and I owe a response. You have to wonder how far he's progressed on the latest 12 step program.
Truth is, the new guy brought weak sauce to the table in a tame effort to convince everyone (1) Mueller hit paydirt, (2) Russia is a bigger global threat than China (nice to know the new guy is with the WHO), and (3) Trump v. Fauci was not a "thing". OK, sure.
Quantity is not quality. And if you want to learn how best to "bait", realize 'Watcher just accomplished in one short line what you've been sadly jonesing for, all over this thread for the better of the last two plus days. He got my attention. And you didn't.
++++++++++
Lots of encouraging developments over the last 24 hours. Maybe I'll check in later … or maybe not.
Hey Chuck, great to see you're still out there my friend! Despite your claim, I'm not a "new guy". Again, as I stated in my original post in this thread, I've been around for 15 years. Just haven't ever posted in non-hockey topics. Also, not trying to "bait you", simply surprised that you aren't willing to engage in an honest debate about the various claims/conservative talking points you've made from the start of the first Covid thread. Still no response though eh? Oh well, I'll just continue to chime in on your future posts if I feel you're spouting inaccurate info. Funny though, someone comes in and actually challenges you point to point and you choose to slink away to the corner. I have found that that's what conservatives/righties tend to do when truly forced to defend their talking points. Especially when the actual real FACTS legitimately prove their statements simply aren't true. That or they start to name call and attack someone personally. It's obvious you generally don't do the latter which, you are to be commended for. Stay safe Chuck and I am watching, waiting, and willing to chime in.
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Probably FlagDUDE's latest burner account, along with NPC19850330.
Probably FlagDUDE's latest burner account, along with NPC19850330.
I don't think you've been paying close attention here netpresence. Lefties have been name calling or worse on this thread incessantly! Not you of course. You're above the fray.Hey Chuck, great to see you're still out there my friend! Despite your claim, I'm not a "new guy". Again, as I stated in my original post in this thread, I've been around for 15 years. Just haven't ever posted in non-hockey topics. Also, not trying to "bait you", simply surprised that you aren't willing to engage in an honest debate about the various claims/conservative talking points you've made from the start of the first Covid thread. Still no response though eh? Oh well, I'll just continue to chime in on your future posts if I feel you're spouting inaccurate info. Funny though, someone comes in and actually challenges you point to point and you choose to slink away to the corner. I have found that that's what conservatives/righties tend to do when truly forced to defend their talking points. Especially when the actual real FACTS legitimately prove their statements simply aren't true. That or they start to name call and attack someone personally. It's obvious you generally don't do the latter which, you are to be commended for. Stay safe Chuck and I am watching, waiting, and willing to chime in.
TalonsUpPuckDown
Roll along you BG Warriors!
One situation requires risking one’s life for one’s survival. The other needlessly asks one to risk their life to exercise a constitutional right when it’s been shown there are options to execute said right without putting one’s life in danger.
Do you know which is which?
Darius
Go 'cats!
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
364,723 infected, 10,781 dead = 2.96% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/6/20 ?:??:?? PM.
337,072 infected, 9,619 dead = 2.85% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/5/20 7:13:44 PM.
308,850 infected, 8,476 dead = 2.74% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/4/20 8:51:28 PM.
244,678 infected, 5,911 dead = 2.42% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/2/20 8:42:13 PM.
203,608 infected, 4,476 dead = 2.2% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/1/20 2:20:57 PM.
177,452 infected, 3,440 dead = 1.94% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/31/20 2:38:01 PM.
156,931 infected, 2,880 dead = 1.84% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/30/20 3:11:53 PM.
124,763 infected, 2,191 dead = 1.76% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/29/20 10:03:59 AM.
105,470 infected, 1,710 dead = 1.62% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/28/20 11:12:24 AM.
86,012 infected, 1,301 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/27/20 11:13:47 AM.
80,021 infected, 1,136 dead = 1.42% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/26/20 4:29:16 PM.
69,197 infected, 1,046 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/26/20 7:29:49 AM.
62,086 infected, 869 dead = 1.4% Johns Hopkins data as of 3/25/20 3:26:24 PM.
US population = 330,000,000, projected infections 70,000,000 - 150,000,000 = 2,198,000 - 4,710,000 deaths at 3.14%.
CDC estimates that, from October 1, 2019, through March 14, 2020, there have been 23,000 – 59,000 US flu deaths.
I first posted this in response to "It's the flu" comments. I understand all of what is wrong with the above numbers, don't remind me. Or do.
383,256 infected, 12,021 dead = 3.14% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/7/20 2:25:55 PM.
364,723 infected, 10,781 dead = 2.96% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/6/20 ?:??:?? PM.
337,072 infected, 9,619 dead = 2.85% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/5/20 7:13:44 PM.
308,850 infected, 8,476 dead = 2.74% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/4/20 8:51:28 PM.
244,678 infected, 5,911 dead = 2.42% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/2/20 8:42:13 PM.
203,608 infected, 4,476 dead = 2.2% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/1/20 2:20:57 PM.
177,452 infected, 3,440 dead = 1.94% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/31/20 2:38:01 PM.
156,931 infected, 2,880 dead = 1.84% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/30/20 3:11:53 PM.
124,763 infected, 2,191 dead = 1.76% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/29/20 10:03:59 AM.
105,470 infected, 1,710 dead = 1.62% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/28/20 11:12:24 AM.
86,012 infected, 1,301 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/27/20 11:13:47 AM.
80,021 infected, 1,136 dead = 1.42% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/26/20 4:29:16 PM.
69,197 infected, 1,046 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/26/20 7:29:49 AM.
62,086 infected, 869 dead = 1.4% Johns Hopkins data as of 3/25/20 3:26:24 PM.
US population = 330,000,000, projected infections 70,000,000 - 150,000,000 = 2,198,000 - 4,710,000 deaths at 3.14%.
CDC estimates that, from October 1, 2019, through March 14, 2020, there have been 23,000 – 59,000 US flu deaths.
I first posted this in response to "It's the flu" comments. I understand all of what is wrong with the above numbers, don't remind me. Or do.
Figures don't lie but liars figure Darius383,256 infected, 12,021 dead = 3.14% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/7/20 2:25:55 PM.
364,723 infected, 10,781 dead = 2.96% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/6/20 ?:??:?? PM.
337,072 infected, 9,619 dead = 2.85% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/5/20 7:13:44 PM.
308,850 infected, 8,476 dead = 2.74% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/4/20 8:51:28 PM.
244,678 infected, 5,911 dead = 2.42% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/2/20 8:42:13 PM.
203,608 infected, 4,476 dead = 2.2% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/1/20 2:20:57 PM.
177,452 infected, 3,440 dead = 1.94% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/31/20 2:38:01 PM.
156,931 infected, 2,880 dead = 1.84% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/30/20 3:11:53 PM.
124,763 infected, 2,191 dead = 1.76% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/29/20 10:03:59 AM.
105,470 infected, 1,710 dead = 1.62% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/28/20 11:12:24 AM.
86,012 infected, 1,301 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/27/20 11:13:47 AM.
80,021 infected, 1,136 dead = 1.42% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/26/20 4:29:16 PM.
69,197 infected, 1,046 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/26/20 7:29:49 AM.
62,086 infected, 869 dead = 1.4% Johns Hopkins data as of 3/25/20 3:26:24 PM.
US population = 330,000,000, projected infections 70,000,000 - 150,000,000 = 2,198,000 - 4,710,000 deaths at 3.14%.
CDC estimates that, from October 1, 2019, through March 14, 2020, there have been 23,000 – 59,000 US flu deaths.
I first posted this in response to "It's the flu" comments. I understand all of what is wrong with the above numbers, don't remind me. Or do.
Not calling you a liar. You're just the messenger. A good one at that
dontstayathome
New member
You’re posting percentage based on infected. Not what I stated. Also, the 2-4 million is outrageously inflated.383,256 infected, 12,021 dead = 3.14% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/7/20 2:25:55 PM.
364,723 infected, 10,781 dead = 2.96% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/6/20 ?:??:?? PM.
337,072 infected, 9,619 dead = 2.85% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/5/20 7:13:44 PM.
308,850 infected, 8,476 dead = 2.74% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/4/20 8:51:28 PM.
244,678 infected, 5,911 dead = 2.42% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/2/20 8:42:13 PM.
203,608 infected, 4,476 dead = 2.2% Johns Hopkins data as of: 4/1/20 2:20:57 PM.
177,452 infected, 3,440 dead = 1.94% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/31/20 2:38:01 PM.
156,931 infected, 2,880 dead = 1.84% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/30/20 3:11:53 PM.
124,763 infected, 2,191 dead = 1.76% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/29/20 10:03:59 AM.
105,470 infected, 1,710 dead = 1.62% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/28/20 11:12:24 AM.
86,012 infected, 1,301 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/27/20 11:13:47 AM.
80,021 infected, 1,136 dead = 1.42% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/26/20 4:29:16 PM.
69,197 infected, 1,046 dead = 1.51% Johns Hopkins data as of: 3/26/20 7:29:49 AM.
62,086 infected, 869 dead = 1.4% Johns Hopkins data as of 3/25/20 3:26:24 PM.
US population = 330,000,000, projected infections 70,000,000 - 150,000,000 = 2,198,000 - 4,710,000 deaths at 3.14%.
CDC estimates that, from October 1, 2019, through March 14, 2020, there have been 23,000 – 59,000 US flu deaths.
I first posted this in response to "It's the flu" comments. I understand all of what is wrong with the above numbers, don't remind me. Or do.
The early models for projected cases/deaths were 4x higher than reality. That’s why they adjusted the models yesterday.
We’re talking 1100-1500 deaths right now at the supposed peak. Do you really believe them numbers will hold steady for 2000 days?
That would be on the conservative end of the number deaths you just posted.
net presence
Active member
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
ecat, you are correct that some of my "teammates" occasionally indulge in that type of behavior and I should've mentioned that in my post. Still, I also don't feel its anywhere close to a 50/50 split. Is it 90/10 or 80/20 of "righties" vs "lefties" doing it? No. But it its probably 60/40 or 65/35. In my opinion? Yes, I think it is. Heck, we don't have to look any further than dontstayathome's first few posts today for an example. He comes right out of the gate being overtly confrontational. To close, I just believe that we need to disagree/debate the information as respectfully as we can if we're ever going to truly move forward.
ecat, you are correct that some of my "teammates" occasionally indulge in that type of behavior and I should've mentioned that in my post. Still, I also don't feel its anywhere close to a 50/50 split. Is it 90/10 or 80/20 of "righties" vs "lefties" doing it? No. But it its probably 60/40 or 65/35. In my opinion? Yes, I think it is. Heck, we don't have to look any further than dontstayathome's first few posts today for an example. He comes right out of the gate being overtly confrontational. To close, I just believe that we need to disagree/debate the information as respectfully as we can if we're ever going to truly move forward.
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
You seem to be confused about a number of things about the modeling and what Darius is trying to say.
First of all, the current projection that was updated to around 80K deaths assumes full social distancing is enacted everywhere and continues through August. I personally think it's going to be higher than that, because I don't think, even where enacted, that the social distancing has been fully embraced. There are still tons of companies deemed "essential" that require people to congregate and travel. Certainly better than no social distancing at all (obviously), but not the full distancing their models presume - and let's be clear, early models badly underestimated the spread of the virus in this country.
Anyway, there are still models showing that if we did nothing and continued life as usual that around 30-50% of the population would eventually be infected. There are also studies around that try to estimate what the actual death rate is, including asymptomatic carriers. They estimated that around 0.7% of the people who contracted COVID, whether or not they showed symptoms, would die given adequate health care. 330M (US population) * 0.3 (low end of the % of number of people who would have gotten it) * .007 (best estimation of the true death rate) = 700K deaths if we did nothing to counteract the spread and the death rate remained steady. However, at that infection rate, we know that the level of care would drop severely and that the true death rate would rise, possibly to 3 or 4 times what it is under good health care (judging by what's happened in developed European countries and seems to be beginning in NYC). That's where the 2-3 million comes from.
As I said yesterday. Anyone who at any point who has tried to peddle this bull**** "it's just the flu" or "we should just let everybody get infected for herd immunity" has no ****ing idea what they are talking about and would be doing the world a favor by removing themselves from the conversation as quickly as possible. Millions of deaths was easily a realistic outcome if we did nothing. Thankfully we had college and professional sports leagues willing to pull the plug on multi-million dollar tournaments and seasons and actually alert the public that this strain of COVID was not normal, all while the president was still poo-pooing the danger COVID presented.
EDIT: And you're already behind on the national peak. We're going to approach 1800 today. And I've seen no one try to claim we're at or even near the national peak. New York is approaching it's peak in the next couple of days (again, I doubt the peak for deaths will be tomorrow; it's a trailing indicator), but there are plenty of other hot spots such as Detroit, New Orleans, Atlanta, and seemingly most of the rest of the northeast that can easily rise up and continue the national rise.
EDIT 2: And I see you've just joined this week for the purpose of posting in this thread. What a ********* of a username you've chosen. I sincerely hope nobody you care about gets sick because of your hideously misinformed advice. To say nothing of the health workers who are put more at risk for every ******* who decides he/she is smarter than the scientists and goes out in public during this time.
You seem to be confused about a number of things about the modeling and what Darius is trying to say.
First of all, the current projection that was updated to around 80K deaths assumes full social distancing is enacted everywhere and continues through August. I personally think it's going to be higher than that, because I don't think, even where enacted, that the social distancing has been fully embraced. There are still tons of companies deemed "essential" that require people to congregate and travel. Certainly better than no social distancing at all (obviously), but not the full distancing their models presume - and let's be clear, early models badly underestimated the spread of the virus in this country.
Anyway, there are still models showing that if we did nothing and continued life as usual that around 30-50% of the population would eventually be infected. There are also studies around that try to estimate what the actual death rate is, including asymptomatic carriers. They estimated that around 0.7% of the people who contracted COVID, whether or not they showed symptoms, would die given adequate health care. 330M (US population) * 0.3 (low end of the % of number of people who would have gotten it) * .007 (best estimation of the true death rate) = 700K deaths if we did nothing to counteract the spread and the death rate remained steady. However, at that infection rate, we know that the level of care would drop severely and that the true death rate would rise, possibly to 3 or 4 times what it is under good health care (judging by what's happened in developed European countries and seems to be beginning in NYC). That's where the 2-3 million comes from.
As I said yesterday. Anyone who at any point who has tried to peddle this bull**** "it's just the flu" or "we should just let everybody get infected for herd immunity" has no ****ing idea what they are talking about and would be doing the world a favor by removing themselves from the conversation as quickly as possible. Millions of deaths was easily a realistic outcome if we did nothing. Thankfully we had college and professional sports leagues willing to pull the plug on multi-million dollar tournaments and seasons and actually alert the public that this strain of COVID was not normal, all while the president was still poo-pooing the danger COVID presented.
EDIT: And you're already behind on the national peak. We're going to approach 1800 today. And I've seen no one try to claim we're at or even near the national peak. New York is approaching it's peak in the next couple of days (again, I doubt the peak for deaths will be tomorrow; it's a trailing indicator), but there are plenty of other hot spots such as Detroit, New Orleans, Atlanta, and seemingly most of the rest of the northeast that can easily rise up and continue the national rise.
EDIT 2: And I see you've just joined this week for the purpose of posting in this thread. What a ********* of a username you've chosen. I sincerely hope nobody you care about gets sick because of your hideously misinformed advice. To say nothing of the health workers who are put more at risk for every ******* who decides he/she is smarter than the scientists and goes out in public during this time.
Last edited:
Darius
Go 'cats!
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
The interesting thing to me and yes I know the rate of increase varies day to day, but the mortality rate continues to increase. Two weeks ago I figured it would have been decreasing rapidly because of increased testing. The Drs. keep saying we are in for a rough two weeks.
The interesting thing to me and yes I know the rate of increase varies day to day, but the mortality rate continues to increase. Two weeks ago I figured it would have been decreasing rapidly because of increased testing. The Drs. keep saying we are in for a rough two weeks.
Darius
Go 'cats!
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
It's partly because deaths come about 2 weeks after symptoms start showing in most cases. In a perfect world where we caught every case as soon as symptoms started to show, deaths and death rate would actually remain at or very close to 0 for about a week and a half as cases piled up, and then the deaths catch up at the end as new cases dwindle away. That's why even if NYC has hit or is a day or so away from the peak of the infections, deaths will likely continue to rise or at least stay the same for the next week to 10 days.
The scary numbers are in Western Europe, where this whole process started a couple weeks before ours. We're talking about developed Western European countries (multiple!) with reported death rates >10% and Spain and France will likely join them in the next day or two. Italy in particular has tested double per capita of what the US has (theoretically catching more minor cases), and their death rate is still at 12.6%. An older population on average only explains so much.
It's partly because deaths come about 2 weeks after symptoms start showing in most cases. In a perfect world where we caught every case as soon as symptoms started to show, deaths and death rate would actually remain at or very close to 0 for about a week and a half as cases piled up, and then the deaths catch up at the end as new cases dwindle away. That's why even if NYC has hit or is a day or so away from the peak of the infections, deaths will likely continue to rise or at least stay the same for the next week to 10 days.
The scary numbers are in Western Europe, where this whole process started a couple weeks before ours. We're talking about developed Western European countries (multiple!) with reported death rates >10% and Spain and France will likely join them in the next day or two. Italy in particular has tested double per capita of what the US has (theoretically catching more minor cases), and their death rate is still at 12.6%. An older population on average only explains so much.
Last edited:
Re: COVID-19 - Part 2
Just saw in the mirror that your post name is sufur, and that is what all of us are doing when we read your drivel. The H1N1 totals did not OCCUR over the year, but 2 - 2-1/2 months. First reported in Mid April 2009 and over by mid to late june. The WUHAN Virus cases in the US started in mid to late February so we are almost 7 weeks in. Dont let selective usage of dates skew your figures.
Can I ask what did you do during the lockdown for the H1N1 outbreak? Was your business deemed essential or did you have to work from home while the kids remote schooled during the state quarantines? I remember the hysteria of the time as depicted on the chilling CNN and MSNBC reports. Was it Wolf Blitzer who kept hitting Barry with all of those "why werent you better prepared gothcas"?
Just saw in the mirror that your post name is sufur, and that is what all of us are doing when we read your drivel. The H1N1 totals did not OCCUR over the year, but 2 - 2-1/2 months. First reported in Mid April 2009 and over by mid to late june. The WUHAN Virus cases in the US started in mid to late February so we are almost 7 weeks in. Dont let selective usage of dates skew your figures.
Can I ask what did you do during the lockdown for the H1N1 outbreak? Was your business deemed essential or did you have to work from home while the kids remote schooled during the state quarantines? I remember the hysteria of the time as depicted on the chilling CNN and MSNBC reports. Was it Wolf Blitzer who kept hitting Barry with all of those "why werent you better prepared gothcas"?
- Status