Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
jk

2020 Dumpster Fire (Enter at your own risk)

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Cratter said:

Hard to get an accurate measure of daily deaths when states keep dumping old deaths into the new numbers.

Especially when they never tested positive but "probably." 

This could go on for a long time.

New Jersey added 1,800 deaths to their one day total and might keep adding old probably deaths to the new daily numbers.

....and that's just one state.

 

 

 

Why do we keep going over this?  Covid casualty figures are no less accurate than those of H1N1’s, or the flu.  The CDC by and large calculates them the same way; all of them littered with 'probably' old deaths added after the fact.   

Is it 100% accurate?  Of course not.  But, at the very least, we have a uniform platform whereby to measure the seriousness of each disease relative to each other.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said:

 

Why do we keep going over this?  Covid casualty figures are no less accurate than those of H1N1’s, or the flu.  The CDC by and large calculates them the same way; all of them littered with 'probably' old deaths added after the fact.   

Is it 100% accurate?  Of course not.  But, at the very least, we have a uniform platform whereby to measure the seriousness of each disease relative to each other.  

The problem is with that is right now, both political parties are using those death numbers for political positioning heading into November.   The number the media should be using is death percentage per positive case.  Taking a swag at death counts going back in time and throwing that number in a chart does nothing but scare people when the media shows a huge jump in death overnight.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Was the curve flattened, or not? 

If the curve was never capable of being adequately 'flattened,' then the entire exercise was one in futility.

 

The point of the shut-down wasn't to flatten the curve forever.  That's impossible.  The shut-down is a holding pattern.  It 'flattens the curve' while you come up with a solution to the problem.  

We as a country chose to shut down (taking a drastic economic hit) but instead of uniformly moving forward to a solution, half the country complained about shutting down and rebelled against precautionary opening up policies.  Actually, nobody followed CDC guidelines outright.     

.....and here we are.  An economy in the toilet and (unlike tons of other countries) covid running wild.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said:

 

The point of the shut-down wasn't to flatten the curve forever.  That's impossible.  The shut-down is a holding pattern.  It 'flattens the curve' while you come up with a solution to the problem.  

We as a country chose to shut down (taking a drastic economic hit) but instead of uniformly moving forward to a solution, half the country complained about shutting down and rebelled against precautionary opening up policies.  Actually, nobody followed CDC guidelines outright.     

.....and here we are.  An economy in the toilet and (unlike tons of other countries) covid running wild.  

 

You feel that a uniform policy moving forward was really an option?  All 50 states implementing the same policy month by month.....during an election year.  Huh.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, homer said:

The problem is with that is right now, both political parties are using those death numbers for political positioning heading into November.   The number the media should be using is death percentage per positive case.  Taking a swag at death counts going back in time and throwing that number in a chart does nothing but scare people when the media shows a huge jump in death overnight.  

 

The media's responsibility is an entirely different topic than how official casual numbers are counted.  In any event, when your in the eye of the storm of a pandemic numbers tend to be under-reported.  We're not gonna have the true scope of this until years after the fact.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, UNDlaw80 said:

 

Why do we keep going over this?  Covid casualty figures are no less accurate than those of H1N1’s, or the flu.  The CDC by and large calculates them the same way; all of them littered with 'probably' old deaths added after the fact.   

Is it 100% accurate?  Of course not.  But, at the very least, we have a uniform platform whereby to measure the seriousness of each disease relative to each other.  

The point is how do we know current death numbers? Which was the first sentence of my post.

Quote

Hard to get an accurate measure of daily deaths when states keep dumping old deaths into the new numbers

Just like new confirmed coronavirus cases. We know a spike in new coronavirus cases are from new coronavirus cases.

But we cant say that for the new daily death counts.

"Spike in new coronavirus cases. Well we added some coronavirus cases from april. So now there's a new spike."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said:

 

The media's responsibility is an entirely different topic than how official casual numbers are counted.  In any event, when your in the eye of the storm of a pandemic numbers tend to be under-reported.  We're not gonna have the true scope of this until years after the fact.     

Underreported deaths and under reported infection counts.  Both are very important to the narrative of the virus but only one gets the attention from media and half of our political leadership   

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dynato said:

This is a fake tweet designed to brainwash and rattle you.

the tweet might be fake but the you don't have to be a dummy to realize this is what is happening....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How ironic that we're nearly bankrupting hospitals to treat sick covid patients. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, homer said:

The problem is with that is right now, both political parties are using those death numbers for political positioning heading into November.   The number the media should be using is death percentage per positive case.  Taking a swag at death counts going back in time and throwing that number in a chart does nothing but scare people when the media shows a huge jump in death overnight.  

The problem is that there are still people downplaying COVID and comparing it to the flu.  But the CDC models the number of flu deaths.  They don't have accurate counts at all.  The same will happen with COVID after the fact and the number of fatalities will undoubtedly rise.  By not taking a swag at the death counts the states aren't providing good information for public policy.

And while I agree that the death counts shouldn't be be main metric, I don't think that deaths per case is that useful either.  Cases are far too dependent on testing.  Nobody really has a good idea of how many people have had COVID.  Either fewer people have it and the death rate is quite high, or more people have it and the spread is more aggressive than we thought.  And the problem with deaths, of course, is the underlying factors.

Hospitalizations is probably the best metric.  That is a solid number that reflects serious cases that are either going to result in death or extended impacts.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, wxman91 said:

Either fewer people have it and the death rate is quite high, or more people have it and the spread is more aggressive than we thought.  

I see you left out where more people have it than we know....meaning it isn't nearly as dangerous as we thought and certainly not as fatal as many were thinking/hoping.  The fatality rates drops bigtime as testing ramps up.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, dynato said:

This is a fake tweet designed to brainwash and rattle you.

It may be fake but their actions prove that is the strategy--- goal.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, UND1983 said:

I see you left out where more people have it than we know....meaning it isn't nearly as dangerous as we thought and certainly not as fatal as many were thinking/hoping.  The fatality rates drops bigtime as testing ramps up.

which means that the big big headlines should read ..."chinese flu not nearly as deadly as first thought...not even fu:(*()ing close"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, UND1983 said:

I see you left out where more people have it than we know....meaning it isn't nearly as dangerous as we thought and certainly not as fatal as many were thinking/hoping.  The fatality rates drops bigtime as testing ramps up.

Well, it has killed a lot of people, so it is either deadly or transmits very easily.  That makes it dangerous either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:

which means that the big big headlines should read ..."chinese flu not nearly as deadly as first thought...not even fu:(*()ing close"

So, to be clear, after 120,000 US deaths (and counting) the headlines should be, “whew, that wasn’t very deadly”?  That is some tortured logic there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, wxman91 said:

So, to be clear, after 120,000 US deaths (and counting) the headlines should be, “whew, that wasn’t very deadly”?  That is some tortured logic there.

It's all comparison based.  Being we have never shut down schools, an economy, and lost 40 million jobs for anything else in recent memory, it's been pretty underwhelming when you factor that in, which is a pretty big factor.  Also, considering we can easily compare yearly causes of death, yah it's been not nearly as bad as most said and hoped.  

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The Sicatoka said:

We gave the experts three months, flatten the curve, to get an understanding and prepared.

This is viral.

This genie is out of the bottle.

It will take it’s share. Get over it; viruses kill people. 

And all we can do is react. We are not in control. Nature is.

I say drop all the restrictions.

Then you decide how you want to play it. Live your freedom your way. 

2/1 thru 6/20 per CDC 160 COVID (related) deaths 24 and younger. Under 14......28. 

#saferathomethanatschool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The Sicatoka said:

We gave the experts three months, flatten the curve, to get an understanding and prepared.

This is viral.

This genie is out of the bottle.

It will take it’s share. Get over it; viruses kill people. 

And all we can do is react. We are not in control. Nature is.

I say drop all the restrictions.

Then you decide how you want to play it. Live your freedom your way. 

Are you quoting Greg Abbott from May here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oxbow6 said:

2/1 thru 6/20 per CDC 160 COVID (related) deaths 24 and younger. Under 14......28. 

#saferathomethanatschool

It’s hard to argue no school when night clubs are packed, the President is holding rallies with thousands indoors, and mass protests, but you do realize there’s not much school happening in the summer months right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, The Sicatoka said:

We gave the experts three months, flatten the curve, to get an understanding and prepared.

This is viral.

This genie is out of the bottle.

It will take it’s share. Get over it; viruses kill people. 

And all we can do is react. We are not in control. Nature is.

I say drop all the restrictions.

Then you decide how you want to play it. Live your freedom your way. 

We’ve gained a decent understanding of COVID.  We don’t have a vaccine so the best avoidance methods are masks and restricting close contact indoors.  Pay extra attention to the elderly and those with preexisting conditions, especially lung-related.  Make sure that workers in densely-populated industries have proper PPE.
 

Transmission outdoors seems minimal, so open up the parks, beaches, etc.  The impact on school-aged children is minimal, so let the schools open with some modifications allowed for teachers.  I am in a district where parents will be given a choice for distance-learning.  I will be sending my daughter in.

 

North Dakota seems to be doing fine.  A few dozen positive tests a day. Low population density certainly seems to help. ND has, seemingly appropriately, moved to a low level of restrictions.
 

So, my question is, who exactly are you referring to when you talk about removing all restrictions?  North Dakota, or the US in general?  Why should the rules in a low COVID-impacted state apply to other places that aren’t doing well?

 

Moving to the political side, this board certainly leans to the Conservative/Libertarian side.  The calls for “opening up the country”, however, are pretty much opposite of the federalism system you seem to defend so heavily.  Maybe someone from the R/L side can tell me why Greg Abbott and the Rs in Texas at the state level eliminated the ability of the large cities in TX to put on additional restrictions.  Isn’t a core tenet of conservatism local control?  It seems like conservatives have ceded their response to COVID to their leader, who’s only care in the world is re-election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an election year....for the office of President.  I stated back in March, "I really wish this wasn't an election year".  Everything is skewed because of it.  

Then again, what a coincidence this goes down during the year of our mostly hotly contested, polarizing election possibly ever.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Report: At Least 54,000 Coronavirus Deaths Linked To Nursing Homes

 

 

Quote

 

While only 11% of confirmed coronavirus cases have been linked to nursing homes and long-term elderly care centers, Americans living or working in nursing homes have accounted for approximately 43% of coronavirus-linked deaths, according to The New York Times.

The Times, which has compiled a database of COVID-19 cases, reports that about 12,000 nursing homes and care centers have been linked to 282,000 cases. Of these cases, 54,000 people have died.

“Infected people linked to nursing homes also die at a higher rate than the general population,” reports the Times. “The median case fatality rate — the number of deaths divided by the number of cases — at facilities with reliable data is 17 percent, significantly higher than the 5 percent case fatality rate nationwide.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wxman91 said:

We’ve gained a decent understanding of COVID.  We don’t have a vaccine so the best avoidance methods are masks and restricting close contact indoors.  Pay extra attention to the elderly and those with preexisting conditions, especially lung-related.  Make sure that workers in densely-populated industries have proper PPE.
 

Transmission outdoors seems minimal, so open up the parks, beaches, etc.  The impact on school-aged children is minimal, so let the schools open with some modifications allowed for teachers.  I am in a district where parents will be given a choice for distance-learning.  I will be sending my daughter in.

 

North Dakota seems to be doing fine.  A few dozen positive tests a day. Low population density certainly seems to help. ND has, seemingly appropriately, moved to a low level of restrictions.
 

So, my question is, who exactly are you referring to when you talk about removing all restrictions?  North Dakota, or the US in general?  Why should the rules in a low COVID-impacted state apply to other places that aren’t doing well?

 

Moving to the political side, this board certainly leans to the Conservative/Libertarian side.  The calls for “opening up the country”, however, are pretty much opposite of the federalism system you seem to defend so heavily.  Maybe someone from the R/L side can tell me why Greg Abbott and the Rs in Texas at the state level eliminated the ability of the large cities in TX to put on additional restrictions.  Isn’t a core tenet of conservatism local control?  It seems like conservatives have ceded their response to COVID to their leader, who’s only care in the world is re-election.

you do know the difference between "restrictions" and "your barber shop is now CLOSED indefinitely and if you open up you will go to jail and pay a hefty fine"

big big difference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...