Fauci Says there is a way sports (ie Professional Sports) can resume this summer.... this does not sound good for softball to return before fall...

[whiporee]

Such a good post until you included China. The CCP has failed miserably at informing the rest of the world about the effects of this virus. You can argue/discuss whether or not the virus was let out on purpose but there is no arguing that China has tried to cover this virus up.

Maybe. I don't know that it would have mattered what they did or didn't say. We had plenty of lead time -- we're just not a society used to thinking about disasters before they happen. So I don't blame for china for the virus any more than I blame anyone else. If China had made an announcement that this terrible disease had been unleashed, I think we would have pretty much blown it off. It's what we do -- not the US, but all of humanity. So sometimes nature gives us the middle finger. This time it was a virus. next time it might be a storm or a tsunami or a volcano. Chaos is the nature of living things and this is another tragic example of it.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't do all we can, or that the results aren't terrible. I just don't think there's a country or person to blame. This is more an ecosystem thing than a political or personal one.

 

[Chris8]

That's not fair. He's got a foundation that's doing what it can to track things. Ideally, the government would have done that, but the mechanisms aren't in place. But all the IHME is doing is collecting data and trying to project it. There's nothing nefarious about it, and frankly, condemning a guy who's given away about 36 billion dollars is harsh. If anything, the IHME models have done a lot to take away people's concerns about the virus -- remember when the experts were talking about 2.2 million deaths? At least providing everyone with data -- again, which should have been the government's job -- gives people a somwhat accurate idea of what is going on.

There is no bad guy in any of this. Not Trump, not Biden, not Pelosi or McConnell. Not Gates, not Fauci or Birx. Not even, in my opinion, China. It's a bug that went form animals to people and then spread. It sucks, it happens, it will have long-last repercussions, but it's not anything anyone did, and vilifying anyone for it seems a touch extreme.

But that's one of the problems the modeling is turning out to be horribly in accurate. from 1-2 million deaths in US was eventually revised down to 60-80 thousand.....that's a huge range....and the IMHE data was the reason our state shut down....it didn't take away our state leaders concern, they pointed to the IMHE as the reason for shut down stay home. Eventually the numbers became lower from the IMHE but the decisions were already made and stay home in place. Decisions were made on based on the IMHE data that turned out to be very inaccurate. Half the deaths in our state have been at nursing homes. Sad...but that's not the general population roaming about either.

 

[whiporee]

But that's one of the problems the modeling is turning out to be horribly in accurate. from 1-2 million deaths in US was eventually revised down to 60-80 thousand.....that's a huge range....and the IMHE data was the reason our state shut down....it didn't take away our state leaders concern, they pointed to the IMHE as the reason for shut down stay home. Eventually the numbers became lower from the IMHE but the decisions were already made and stay home in place. Decisions were made on based on the IMHE data that turned out to be very inaccurate. Half the deaths in our state have been at nursing homes. Sad...but that's not the general population roaming about either.

I think there were two different things going on then. One was the Imperial model, which is where the entire concept of flattening the curve came from. The second was the original CDC models, which were wholly incomplete. The IMHE came in rather late in the process. it was never meant to be medically predictive -- it's mostly taking reported cases and reacting them to whatever measures are in place, and it gives a crazy range of results. it's been adopted because there's not a suitable government replacement for it. And it was widely criticized for being way too conservative, because the Imperial model was showing total disaster. But the two aren't the same thing.

 

[Gtrips07]

About as closed loop as you can get.

What the Wuhan Virus on the USS Theodore Roosevelt Tells Us About What We Should Do Next

www.redstate.com

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Bullseye]

I think there were two different things going on then. One was the Imperial model, which is where the entire concept of flattening the curve came from. The second was the original CDC models, which were wholly incomplete. The IMHE came in rather late in the process. it was never meant to be medically predictive -- it's mostly taking reported cases and reacting them to whatever measures are in place, and it gives a crazy range of results. it's been adopted because there's not a suitable government replacement for it. And it was widely criticized for being way too conservative, because the Imperial model was showing total disaster. But the two aren't the same thing.

No pre plan. Late start. Bad predictive models. Turning out to be an expensive learning curve. Hard to listen when they each dont agree.

 

[_MIA_]

That graph is for the US...WITH Social Distancing in place for most of the country.

If you want to say that any number of deaths (because essentially that is what you are saying when you don't have any idea of what would happen should you let everybody do what they want to do) is worth saving our freedoms and the economy then fine. However don't use the flu, or cancer or car accidents or heart disease, to make this argument. This isn't the flu, it is likely much more deadly and contagious...in particular without a vaccine or viable treatments. This isn't heart disease, or cancer or dying in swimming pools, etc. etc. Those things are not contagious...that is why those lines are straight..

Here is a graph which shows how Sweden, who took a much less "intrusive" approach, compares to their neighboring countries, who took a more intrusive approach:



Further, if you want to see what happens when you don't social distance, look at the NYPD, who obviously couldn't shut down. Nearly 20% of their police officers were infected. Or that meat packing plant in South Dakota where 644 employees out of 3700 were infected.

I'm all for opening up (obviously....who isn't I don't like this anymore than anybody else) once we have a plan for doing so safely so that this doesn't get out of our control. At the moment we don't have enough tools in our toolbox in a good portion of the country to do this IMO.

 

[Bullseye]

View attachment 17170

That graph is for the US...WITH Social Distancing in place for most of the country.

If you want to say that any number of deaths (because essentially that is what you are saying when you don't have any idea of what would happen should you let everybody do what they want to do) is worth saving our freedoms and the economy then fine. However don't use the flu, or cancer or car accidents or heart disease, to make this argument. This isn't the flu, it is likely much more deadly and contagious...in particular without a vaccine or viable treatments. This isn't heart disease, or cancer or dying in swimming pools, etc. etc. Those things are not contagious...that is why those lines are straight..

Here is a graph which shows how Sweden, who took a much less "intrusive" approach, compares to their neighboring countries, who took a more intrusive approach:

View attachment 17171

Further, if you want to see what happens when you don't social distance, look at the NYPD, who obviously couldn't shut down. Nearly 20% of their police officers were infected. Or that meat packing plant in South Dakota where 644 employees out of 3700 were infected.

I'm all for opening up (obviously....who isn't I don't like this anymore than anybody else) once we have a plan for doing so safely so that this doesn't get out of our control. At the moment we don't have enough tools in our toolbox in a good portion of the country to do this IMO.

Still waiting for the graph of when the shut down folds the economy completely and people lose everything.
Considering you do care about people. It appears you have a good conscious.
Computate the equation when re-open is essential.

 

[_MIA_]

Still waiting for the graph of when the shut down folds the economy completely and people lose everything.
Considering you do care about people. It appears you have a good conscious.
Computate the equation when re-open is essential.

I am not an economist but my guess is that there are people doing the analysis about how shutting things down longer now vs. opening but potentially having to re-close multiple times will effect the economy in the long run.

In terms of quality of life and death effects, the only thing which would push me toward opening earlier than later, from a moral perspective, is by waiting longer you are essentially sacrificing some longer term QOL for the younger population (who are less likely to die from this) to protect the older part of our population.

 

[clemenslee1]

View attachment 17170

That graph is for the US...WITH Social Distancing in place for most of the country.

If you want to say that any number of deaths (because essentially that is what you are saying when you don't have any idea of what would happen should you let everybody do what they want to do) is worth saving our freedoms and the economy then fine. However don't use the flu, or cancer or car accidents or heart disease, to make this argument. This isn't the flu, it is likely much more deadly and contagious...in particular without a vaccine or viable treatments. This isn't heart disease, or cancer or dying in swimming pools, etc. etc. Those things are not contagious...that is why those lines are straight..

Here is a graph which shows how Sweden, who took a much less "intrusive" approach, compares to their neighboring countries, who took a more intrusive approach:

View attachment 17171

Further, if you want to see what happens when you don't social distance, look at the NYPD, who obviously couldn't shut down. Nearly 20% of their police officers were infected. Or that meat packing plant in South Dakota where 644 employees out of 3700 were infected.

I'm all for opening up (obviously....who isn't I don't like this anymore than anybody else) once we have a plan for doing so safely so that this doesn't get out of our control. At the moment we don't have enough tools in our toolbox in a good portion of the country to do this IMO.

Sweden has a population of 10.2 million people and less than 2000 people have passed. That's roughly .02% of the entire population. You say no social distancing. Is not true, it wasn't forced social distancing.

 

[_MIA_]

Sweden has a population of 10.2 million people and less than 2000 people have passed.

What does that number get to if the graph keeps trending that way for the next month?