Hide Ya Wives, Hide Ya Kids: Worldwide Coronavirus Pandemic!

[green rhino123]

The CDC estimate of IFR is confusing because a) it doesn't match all the data that is out there, b) nobody knows how they came up with the estimate. The best estimates I've seen with good data is 0.5-1.5% for CFR or 0.4-0.7% for IFR. With a young, healthy population and plenty of health care, I'm sure we could find cases where it is 0.26% (Singapore is purportedly even lower). Another way to get there is if the outbreak occurs primarily among college students and young adults.

Why Does the CDC Think the COVID-19 Fatality Rate Is So Low, and Why Won’t It Tell Anyone? | National Review

An explanation would be helpful.

www.nationalreview.com

As for the Fauci quote, he may be correct. Many people are mentally prepared for a year of social distancing. We are much more careful and aware than we were in March. Assuming we don't have large gatherings in the fall and we minimize travel, work from home, etc., then the fall may not be a disaster.

• "We often talk about the possibility of a second wave, or of an outbreak when you reopen. We don't have to accept that as an inevitability."

He is not only saying the fall may not be a disaster, he is going farther than that saying
there may not be a "second wave" at all.

 

[whywesteppin]

Objectively speaking, Fauci is not infallible either.
Check the tape. Never has been, Neither has everyone else. Nobody gets a pass.

Fauci's Song and Dance

Dr. Anthony Fauci has never been muzzled by President Trump, as the lamestream media often charged, but maybe he should have been and should be still. Before his tour de farce before the Senate Health Committee, the shy, modest, and unassuming Dr. Fa...

www.americanthinker.com

Should we take a second look at everything that happened and do better? Of course.

But at a time in March when the best estimates for fatality rate ranged from 0.1% to 10.0%, no sane person would say, "let's let this play out and see what happens." That's potentially playing Russian roulette with the entire country.

Now that we have more widespread testing and good estimates of the numbers from antibody testing, we've narrowed the range and can update our assessments.

It's also misleading to say we were wrong about everything. I don't know how many times I have to say this. In February, people were derided for saying that this would spread quickly and infect a million by the end of April. Or that 100,000 would die in the spring alone. But both turned out to be true. The "covid truthers" promised us this thing could not spread that fast and that only a few thousand people would die, max. Even with what we know now, it's not at all wrong to say that over a million would be dead if we hadn't locked things down.

Could we have selectively left more stuff open? Sure. But we didn't have the tests or the data. We didn't know which regions truly were better off or not. And until today, no place on earth has gone back to normal. By all accounts, if we could magically flip a switch and everyone returned to their old habits and we opened everything, this thing would spread like wildfire again.

 

[IATT]

 

[MrClean510]

What I read was that they extended indefinitely
Smh theres so much more to this than yall think

 

[whywesteppin]

• "We often talk about the possibility of a second wave, or of an outbreak when you reopen. We don't have to accept that as an inevitability."

He is not only saying the fall may not be a disaster, he is going farther than that saying
there may not be a "second wave" at all.

I heard him talking about this in an interview this morning so I hadn't read the article, but I read it now.

I agree with him. If we maintain the practices we're mostly following now, the Rt would stay around 1. This is especially true if the numbers decline throughout the summer and if we have expanded testing. I'm all for partial reopening, especially outdoor spaces.

 

[green rhino123]

Should we take a second look at everything that happened and do better? Of course.

But at a time in March when the best estimates for fatality rate ranged from 0.1% to 10.0%, no sane person would say, "let's let this play out and see what happens." That's potentially playing Russian roulette with the entire country.

Now that we have more widespread testing and good estimates of the numbers from antibody testing, we've narrowed the range and can update our assessments.

It's also misleading to say we were wrong about everything. I don't know how many times I have to say this. In February, people were derided for saying that this would spread quickly and infect a million by the end of April. Or that 100,000 would die in the spring alone. But both turned out to be true. The "covid truthers" promised us this thing could not spread that fast and that only a few thousand people would die, max. Even with what we know now, it's not at all wrong to say that over a million would be dead if we hadn't locked things down.

Could we have selectively left more stuff open? Sure. But we didn't have the tests or the data. We didn't know which regions truly were better off or not. And until today, no place on earth has gone back to normal. By all accounts, if we could magically flip a switch and everyone returned to their old habits and we opened everything, this thing would spread like wildfire again.

I agree that it's more about the future and "updat[ing] our assessments" as you say than the past.
I guess by "our" I would include the people, the government, business, etc. Everyone.

Also, a lot of that wildfire spread happened during some sort of shelter in place (within the us.) So to say "wildfire again" would be comparing different situations & it also infers wildfire as occurred during shelter in place.

 

[xbiker47]

football going to be back in the fall in Texas no matter what

 

[whywesteppin]

I agree that it's more about the future and "updat[ing] our assessments" as you say than the past.
I guess by "our" I would include the people, the government, business, etc. Everyone.

Also, a lot of that wildfire spread happened during some sort of shelter in place. So to say "wildfire again" would be comparing different situations & it also infers wildfire as occurred during shelter in place.

Yeah there's still some mystery to this. People who were militant about isolation still caught it. But nowadays, people seem to be much less careful but we're not seeing the numbers go up.

Here's my crackpot theory: my bag of brown sugar was dry all winter. Hard as a rock. These past couple weeks, it's become soft again. Why? Some combination of increased humidity, less use of the furnace, etc. It seems like coronavirus transmission is aided heavily by indoor spaces, shared circulation, and perhaps low humidity.

 

[green rhino123]

Yeah there's still some mystery to this. People who were militant about isolation still caught it. But nowadays, people seem to be much less careful but we're not seeing the numbers go up.

Here's my crackpot theory: my bag of brown sugar was dry all winter. Hard as a rock. These past couple weeks, it's become soft again. Why? Some combination of increased humidity, less use of the furnace, etc. It seems like coronavirus transmission is aided heavily by indoor spaces, shared circulation, and perhaps low humidity.

It has been very humid lately. It was 100% relative humidity with fog the other night.

 

[boxer15]

 

[stanfan]

What I read was that they extended indefinitely
Smh theres so much more to this than yall think

uhhh what...???

 

[shibadekobe]

I posted two separate things. The first with two links. The second, concerning Fauci,
with one link. Feel free to obfuscate...but if the reality of this is much closer to 0.0026
than the early estimates - a lot of your posts in here would be rendered obsolete...
and I would think you would be very happy with that.

From the beginning, data has been murky at best.
Yes, about half my posts would be obsolete.
I try to post info from unbiased doctors, epidemiologists, statisticians, etc as best I can.
Dentistry Today cites CDC for 0.0026...I would question this due to CDC's poor track record re:C19 data.
What is CDC's purpose of existence? I think they have failed.
As for Fauci, He served under 6 Presidents. He's an expert in both medicine & politics. His Dept backed $MRNA Remdesivir which was a semi-failure but touted it as a success.

 

[whywesteppin]

It has been very humid lately. It was 100% relative humidity with fog the other night.

Here's an article if you're interested. It makes me think everyone should invest in humidifiers for the fall:

One Key Factor in whether COVID-19 Will Wane This Summer

Seasonal respite from the pandemic will depend on what happens indoors, not just outdoors

blogs.scientificamerican.com

 

[whywesteppin]

From the beginning, data has been murky at best.
Yes, about half my posts would be obsolete.
I try to post info from unbiased doctors, epidemiologists, statisticians, etc as best I can.
Dentistry Today cites CDC for 0.0026...I would question this due to CDC's poor track record re:C19 data.
What is CDC's purpose of existence? I think they have failed.
As for Fauci, He served under 6 Presidents. He's an expert in both medicine & politics. His Dept backed $MRNA Remdesivir which was a semi-failure but touted it as a success.

Even if Fauci has been imperfect, we have to give him credit for giving us a sane voice and helping to keep Trump in line.

I think he's also been very measured in most of what he says. Maybe he was a little too kind to Remdesivir and maybe he should have been more forceful in denouncing hydroxychloroquine, but he had to work with what he was given (Trump looking over his shoulder).

 

[wuchi01]

Should we take a second look at everything that happened and do better? Of course.

But at a time in March when the best estimates for fatality rate ranged from 0.1% to 10.0%, no sane person would say, "let's let this play out and see what happens." That's potentially playing Russian roulette with the entire country.

Now that we have more widespread testing and good estimates of the numbers from antibody testing, we've narrowed the range and can update our assessments.

It's also misleading to say we were wrong about everything. I don't know how many times I have to say this. In February, people were derided for saying that this would spread quickly and infect a million by the end of April. Or that 100,000 would die in the spring alone. But both turned out to be true. The "covid truthers" promised us this thing could not spread that fast and that only a few thousand people would die, max. Even with what we know now, it's not at all wrong to say that over a million would be dead if we hadn't locked things down.

Could we have selectively left more stuff open? Sure. But we didn't have the tests or the data. We didn't know which regions truly were better off or not. And until today, no place on earth has gone back to normal. By all accounts, if we could magically flip a switch and everyone returned to their old habits and we opened everything, this thing would spread like wildfire again.

Hindsight always 20/20.
But definitely can’t return to previous old habits with a complete disregard to current situation.
My preference is people question and double check the narrative being peddled. Everyone has an agenda axe to grind.
For all the one size fits all total lockdown approach, can’t miss the social and economic destruction past few months. Has to be better reasonable methods.
What those are is why we all debate about.
See what happens.

 

[shibadekobe]

 

[shibadekobe]

 

[shibadekobe]

 

[shibadekobe]

 

[shibadekobe]

 

[shibadekobe]

 

[shibadekobe]

 

[shibadekobe]

 

[wuchi01]

What I read was that they extended indefinitely
Smh theres so much more to this than yall think

Unbelievable how the quality and standard of life in the City has fallen so far and so quick even from when I was working for longest time at the start of 2000.
What a effing disaster.

 

[shibadekobe]