ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 1628 of 3903
« First < 628112815281578161816241625162616271628 162916301631163216381678172821282628 > Last »
Nzoner's Game Room>***NON-POLITICAL COVID-19 Discussion Thread***
JakeF 10:28 PM 02-26-2020
A couple of reminders...

Originally Posted by Bwana:
Once again, don't come in this thread with some kind of political agenda, or you will be shown the door. If you want to go that route, there is a thread about this in DC.
Originally Posted by Dartgod:
People, there is a lot of good information in this thread, let's try to keep the petty bickering to a minimum.

We all have varying opinions about the impact of this, the numbers, etc. We will all never agree with each other. But we can all keep it civil.

Thanks!

Click here for the original OP:

Spoiler!

[Reply]
Donger 09:40 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
I am gonna watch but it's almost 9 mins long. Can we get a summary?
They did some testing in Bakersfield and believe that California has over 4.7 million cases.

And:

"If you're going to dance on someone's constitutional rights you better have a good reason, you better have a really good reason, not just a theory," he said. "The data is showing us it's time to lift (the stay-at-home orders) so if we don't lift, what is the reason?"

Noymer of UC Irvine disagreed with the doctors' premise that COVID-19 is as widespread as Erickson and Massihi think, saying the idea that nearly 5 million Californians have had the virus is a gross overestimate. The people tested in California were not a random sample; they were mostly people who were symptomatic, Noymer said. Therefore, extrapolating the positive test rate across the entire population of the state is not an accurate way to arrive at how widespread the virus is.

And even if 12 percent of the state has had the virus, that still leaves 88 percent vulnerable to it, Noymer said.

"They’re advancing factual inaccuracies and playing off the esoteric nature of the mortality stats to make a case that the economy should be reopened," Noymer said. "I agree it should be reopened, but it should be opened deliberately, bit by bit, and informed by science. Not informed by a misreading of the mortality."
[Reply]
Bearcat 09:41 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Yeah, I don't know how that article states anything definitive. I know this guy research claims there was not outbreak but we are seeing bodies of people who have it dating back to the time he says they couldn't have had it.
Yeah, it doesn't... just says "no evidence" with mentions of "...and if people had it, there's no way of knowing".

Well... no shit.
[Reply]
Donger 09:41 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by Bowser:
Watch it, THEN react to it.
I watched some of it. Nice gold pitch at the start...
[Reply]
TLO 09:41 AM 04-25-2020
Bowser can we get a brief summary? I'm have a busy day of jacking off, playing video games, as posting on ChiefsPlanet to watch a 90 minute video.
[Reply]
TLO 09:43 AM 04-25-2020
Oh I think Donger just gave the summary.
[Reply]
petegz28 09:45 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by Donger:
They did some testing in Bakersfield and believe that California has over 4.7 million cases.

And:

"If you're going to dance on someone's constitutional rights you better have a good reason, you better have a really good reason, not just a theory," he said. "The data is showing us it's time to lift (the stay-at-home orders) so if we don't lift, what is the reason?"

Noymer of UC Irvine disagreed with the doctors' premise that COVID-19 is as widespread as Erickson and Massihi think, saying the idea that nearly 5 million Californians have had the virus is a gross overestimate. The people tested in California were not a random sample; they were mostly people who were symptomatic, Noymer said. Therefore, extrapolating the positive test rate across the entire population of the state is not an accurate way to arrive at how widespread the virus is.

And even if 12 percent of the state has had the virus, that still leaves 88 percent vulnerable to it, Noymer said.

"They’re advancing factual inaccuracies and playing off the esoteric nature of the mortality stats to make a case that the economy should be reopened," Noymer said. "I agree it should be reopened, but it should be opened deliberately, bit by bit, and informed by science. Not informed by a misreading of the mortality."

Okay so why should I listen to Noymer over these 2 doctors?
[Reply]
notorious 04-25-2020, 09:45 AM
This message has been deleted by notorious.
O.city 09:46 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by Donger:
They did some testing in Bakersfield and believe that California has over 4.7 million cases.

And:

"If you're going to dance on someone's constitutional rights you better have a good reason, you better have a really good reason, not just a theory," he said. "The data is showing us it's time to lift (the stay-at-home orders) so if we don't lift, what is the reason?"

Noymer of UC Irvine disagreed with the doctors' premise that COVID-19 is as widespread as Erickson and Massihi think, saying the idea that nearly 5 million Californians have had the virus is a gross overestimate. The people tested in California were not a random sample; they were mostly people who were symptomatic, Noymer said. Therefore, extrapolating the positive test rate across the entire population of the state is not an accurate way to arrive at how widespread the virus is.

And even if 12 percent of the state has had the virus, that still leaves 88 percent vulnerable to it, Noymer said.

"They’re advancing factual inaccuracies and playing off the esoteric nature of the mortality stats to make a case that the economy should be reopened," Noymer said. "I agree it should be reopened, but it should be opened deliberately, bit by bit, and informed by science. Not informed by a misreading of the mortality."
YOu aren't going to have 88 % of the population get it though. As more people get it, the chances of it spreading goes down.
[Reply]
Donger 09:46 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by TLO:
Oh I think Donger just gave the summary.
They are basically saying that the CFR of COVID-19 is no worse than seasonal influenza and mitigation efforts should be lifted, therefore.
[Reply]
Bowser 09:46 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
I am gonna watch but it's almost 9 mins long. Can we get a summary?
Originally Posted by TLO:
Bowser can we get a brief summary? I'm have a busy day of jacking off, playing video games, as posting on ChiefsPlanet to watch a 90 minute video.
They make a real strong pitch to open up everything real soon because there are way more people infected then we realize. They talk about how herd immunity plays a roll and the dangers of the economy being strapped for prolonged periods of time. It's basically all common sense talk, but they have the data to back up their claims.

Originally Posted by Donger:
I watched some of it. Nice gold pitch at the start...
Is that what scares you off of with opinions and views that differ from yours these days? Lightning bolts and YouTubers with promoters? Lol, ok.
[Reply]
KCUnited 09:47 AM 04-25-2020
What's the main driver limiting the testing capabilities? I know IL has committed to testing >10K per day, but I've never heard how they got to that metric or why it wasn't attainable prior. Is it an available resources thing, manufacturing capabilities? What's it take to make more testing available?
[Reply]
petegz28 09:49 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by Donger:
They are basically saying that the CFR of COVID-19 is no worse than seasonal influenza and mitigation efforts should be lifted, therefore.
If this thing is more contagious than the flu then how many people do you think really have it or have had it?
[Reply]
Donger 09:50 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Okay so why should I listen to Noymer over these 2 doctors?
If the sample wasn't random you can't extrapolate the results. Well, you can, but you shouldn't.
[Reply]
petegz28 09:50 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by KCUnited:
What's the main driver limiting the testing capabilities? I know IL has committed to testing >10K per day, but I've never heard how they got to that metric or why it wasn't attainable prior. Is it an available resources thing, manufacturing capabilities? What's it take to make more testing available?
At some point logistics come into play...

You only have x amount of test kits
You only have x amount of resources to perform the tests
You only have x amount of resources to process the tests

And then you have to actually get the people to come and get tested
[Reply]
Donger 09:50 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by Bowser:
Is that what scares you off of with opinions and views that differ from yours these days? Lightning bolts and YouTubers with promoters? Lol, ok.
No, just noticing an amusing trend.
[Reply]
petegz28 09:53 AM 04-25-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
YOu aren't going to have 88 % of the population get it though. As more people get it, the chances of it spreading goes down.
From what I have heard this is correct. The spreading in and of itself may not go down but the legality of the virus will as it adapts to humans. We have to keep in mind that viruses generally do not want to kill their host.

I have read a few things now where scientists have said that most likely over the next couple of years this virus will become just another virus that causes sniffles and we Lysol away like the other Corona viruses we deal with every day.
[Reply]
Page 1628 of 3903
« First < 628112815281578161816241625162616271628 162916301631163216381678172821282628 > Last »
Up