Well, never mind:
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is now “actively looking into” results from universal COVID-19 testing at Pine Street Inn homeless shelter.My emphasis.
The broad-scale testing took place at the shelter in Boston’s South End a week and a half ago because of a small cluster of cases there.
Of the 397 people tested, 146 people tested positive. Not a single one had any symptoms.
My goodness, whatever would we do without fancy computer models? Next you'll tell me that the Earth will become uninhabitable unless we end use of fossil fuels and turn the everything over to a Socialist World Government ....
This would all be light hearted mockery if it weren't for a 600% increase in calls to the Suicide Prevention hotlines. The company I work for supplies software that the National Suicide Prevention Hotline is using to rapidly scale work-from-home to handle the load. It's cool that this can be done, but it seriously stinks that it has to be done.
At this point, the projections that were the justification for shutting down the economy are worthless. Entirely worthless. Nobody has a basis for the shutdown that's more than having a bad feeling.
That's not a justification, that's a cliché.
23 comments:
You seem to be quite correct, sir. The whole thing is unnecessary.
None of our "career" professionals have seen thier income drop as a result of this, so what's to worry about?
Of the 397 people tested, 146 people tested positive. Not a single one had any symptoms.
Borepatch,
36% infection rate...
what is the status 1.5weeks later and how many are symptomatic or seriously ill?
When there is only half a data set the information is then incomplete.
Follow up?
Not saying the models are correct or wrong, only they have crappy data going in and crappy data coming out. GIGO.
Eck!
Admit you were wrong.
Open it up.
I always maintained the Diamond Princess was the test lab.
Nobody has explained to me why it wasn't, except for the passenger affluence, which may have been representative of the US anyway.
Professor Briggs is a conservative statistician.
His take on this. Part of a series.
https://wmbriggs.com/post/30412/
There are liars, damn liars, and statistics... Add modelers... Mark Twain.
Well. Initially, many smart people (not including CDCP or NIH) looked at what was happening in Communist China and went "Ho Lee Copulation." And then looked at Communist China and said... "Meh, it's Communist China."
And then the news from South Korea and japan came around, showing everyone that Corona-Wuhan is deadly to a very select group of people, and idiots.
Then the Impeachment process failed.
And suddenly everyone and their idiot brother/sister/whatever started screaming "Corona, Corona CORONA!" and the media stirred the flames.
Coincidence? Happenstance? Enemy Action? (With the enemy being mostly the DNC and the Media, with CCP playing a minor part in it?)
More and more, I am seeing the actions of the CDC, NIH, FDA, as actions against the not-removed-from-office President Trump. With active actions by the DNC and the Media to also remove President Trump.
Corona-Wuhan? Meh. I and my lovely wife are in the danger set of people. So precautions and we're A-OKAY!
What the Leftists in and out of government are doing? I am pissed, as I see this whole Corona-Wuhan thingy as a massive attack against the US in general and the President specifically.
Prove me wrong.
Beans, even if the lockdown was a good idea, it has definitely become a weapon for the globohomo Left to use against America and against Trump.
What you apparently chose to overlook from the link was the cluster of 8 deaths that preceded the discovery, and occasioned the universal testing of the entire shelter's population. So, by the by, 2% of 397 is...how many...?
I'll wait.
So, in short, about 50% of the shelter had it, asymptomatically, and thus gave it to and killed 2%. Which is why housing 400 people in a mass shelter is about as stupid amidst a pandemic as it's possible to get, without a helpful crowbar lobotomy.
Once again, 2% of 330M is how many, on your calculator?
Mine reads 6.6M.
Maybe I'm hyperventilating, but somehow, I can't help thinking that 6M deaths is historically significant somehow...
It'll come to me in a minute, I'm sure.
Meantime, would you care to revise and amend your original remarks in any way, in light of the previous? Or does it stand, as is?
Aseop,
Sorta proves my case. Limited and incomplete data can be very misleading. We still have no x days later data like how many
more died or didn't as a result of mitigation at that hot spot.
Yes millions sticks in my craw as it can be a low side number.
in general...
Then again current infection level testing is 34402 (MA), with 1404 dead so if you get this its more than 4% rate of deaths per known infection.
The problem being we don't have a significant percentage of people tested (under 2%!). We do not know haw many may have died at home.
We do not know of those that test positive how many will have an adverse medical event. But worse yet we do not know haw many are carrying an antibody or resistance or if there is a resistance conferred if you have had it.
if you get it and end up on a vent, what deficits will remain after the bug has damaged you? How long to recover from that?
That's a lot of don't knows.
Of course if you don't believe it and get it, how many people have
you exposed before you knew you had it? Now at 4% rate how many
of those people you had contact with will die.
The risks are measured in lives and deaths.
Eck!
Not to downplay the seriousness of the thing but perhaps it's not as deadly now as it was?
Via Zero and Luc Montagnier:
“Nature does not accept any molecular tinkering, it will eliminate these unnatural changes and even if nothing is done, things will get better, but unfortunately after many deaths.”
"Once again, 2% of 330M is how many, on your calculator?"
Does everyone in the US get the flu every year?
Keep polishing that turd, Aesop! But for those of us that can think - if this were really a dangerous pandemic, you’d have a body count, and not endless reams of fake stats and “peer reviewed” common core math to prove it. 😆
I’ll say it again: women think with their emotions and if we are going to give them the vote and political powers... this is the kind of thing that they will do.
We also don't know the Validity of the testing. This is corona 19 …. Do antibodies for Corona 11,12.14 or 6 cause a positive test result ? or maybe develop some immunity if you frequently get this years flu or had a flue shot ? Too many variables.
I build Data Models for a living, Sometimes they are right and sometimes they are way off … But they do impress the budget committee -- the more complex the better.
When someone asks for a model, the first thing I need to know is what do they expect the model to show???
Kung Flu rule of sixes:
Only one in six will catch it.
Only one in six of them will become seriously ill.
Only one in six of them will become critically ill.
Only one in six of them will survive.
We are way past the point that we can put this back in the bottle, thanks to malfeasance by the CDC and FDA. Everybody is going to get this, unless we continue the lockdown until everyone starves.
Unemployment has bad outcomes, and so does starvation. It's very possible that we will lose more people to a continued lockdown than the 2% Aesop is fixated on, and we will still lose his 2%, lockdown or not.
How does one defeat a high-trust civilization when it is not possible to do so by force?
Level the playing field.
I know you are smart enough to get inside a model and evaluate it. Have you done so with the UW model that Trump and his cadre seem to be using? I have and don't find the thing preposterous or dishonest. Yeah, they have crap data like everyone else (and not just from China) which they explicitly acknowledge and modify the estimates as more data becomes available. With a bit of side calculation, you can use it to justify reopening the economy. They have actually done this in their last iteration (on Friday). Personally, I think their calculations are too cautious given the economic downside but the model provides a framework for talking about this.
Everyone has a model, because otherwise you can't even have an opinion. Without a model, you are just going with the feelzs. I prefer my models to be transparent and permeable to new data. In other words, everything that the climate models are not.
Richard, it made sense to lockdown for several weeks while we gathered data, got the CDC and FDA out of the way and prepared hospices for CCP virus victims to keep them out of the regular medical system.
During these few weeks we've gotten new data:
*Hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and zinc are a pretty solid cure, and probably a prophylactic.
* The fatality rate is way lower than the 3% to 10% we first feared. It may turn out to be not much worse than a bad flu - that's still really bad.
* We are learning that the economy is not just how we keep stock prices high, it's also what puts food on our tables. You and I knew that, but it's new info to the Ruling Class.
We need to have cots in convention centers where CCP virus victims can get their Trump Cure pills and palliative care, and we need to get people back to work. We may lose 1% or 2% of the population to the disease, thanks to the CDC and FDA, but ending the lockdown means we don't have to lose even more to starvation.
The lockdown has gone on, at its longest, for five weeks.
So, who's starving...?
And Glen, yeah, no body count...except for the 37K dead already.
You weren't counting them, right?
Or did you think the body bags were filled with Styrofoam packing peanuts?
Go back to telling us drones can't be weaponized. At least there you were wrong inside your own wheelhouse.
37K is a long way from 6.6 Million
Aesop,
Wrong. All totally absolutely nothing but fear mongering.
2% will not die. The homeless population is the most susceptible part of the population - poor nutrition, illness, substance abuse, stress, mental illness. The homeless may have 2% mortality, the national average is not 2%. CDC puts it as 0.1-0.5, Fauci 2 weeks ago put it at 0.35. Mortality rate and R0 are at the high end for influenza. Covid 19 is just a bad flu year.
Stop the fear mongering and stop the idiocy.
Post a Comment