Zollie is a ****ing pinhead

Every night I watch the local news and am given the most recent local counts and the talking heads say "oh, that's good news, that's 2 days in a row with fewer deaths / instances, we're obviously trending in the right direction" / "we're doing so much better than those guys" / "we obviously are doing something a lot better than those guys", etc. And all I can do is think of my session to session poker results and lol my head off if I think that's any indication whatsoever of where I'm going / what I'm doing.

Glol@daytodaynumbers,imoG

No seriously... if you are unwilling to read info that goes against your own confirmation bias, then put me on ignore and f-off. period.

Yes, because the validity of Johnny's takes (and whether he should post them) is soley dependent on whether someone in this thread / someone we know gets sick.

Gwe'reallowedtohaveadiscussionaboutthiswithoutfeel inglikeuncaring*******s,imoG

The only real model to follow is

Sadly I was able to name that wrestler before Googling to confirm.

GIhavenoideawhyIwasabletodothatG

gabba gabba am I wrong?



Don't answer, since you have no basis for any answer you might give.

Good interview on the policy response in Sweden. Doubt anyone will watch.

The world has somehow managed to take an awful situation and create a scenario where I can see no positive outcome. I was really hoping we could somehow avoid a complete economic collapse but right now I am not very hopeful.

I'm sure you are all tired of hearing me make this refrain, but there is no data to support either of these predictions.

I mean, they're possible, and I'd love them to be correct, but just because they fall within a theoretical 95% confidence interview doesn't mean that they're likely, any more than they people who think the actual fatality rate won't come down much once we get good antibody testing data are likely to be correct.

We need to open MDL so Zollie can get APPL back moving in the right direction

This is his opinion/prediction and he postfaces the comment that you won't have that data until all is said and done and to revisit a year from now.

I mean early on Lapidator was saying this wouldn't likely even come close in terms of number of deaths to H1N1 and was singing that tune for awhile until it became silly. With Johnny also saying stuff like what are the odds deaths will reach 70k and we're sooo far away from it(when we were at 18k). "Do you realize it is a 550% increase?!"

Lol that was like what a little over a week ago? For someone who seems so confident in how data and numbers work, you didn't realize like that wasn't a big jump at all?

And this is with all this attention being put on it. Imagine where we'd be at if we just opted to do nothing.

And not nearly everyone is even infected, we're 3 months in and we are at 44k deaths. Yet this threat is overblown? Yeah I don't buy it man.

This is way worse than the flu, car accidents, obesity, drug overdoses. If you don't think it is, well go take a nice cheap vacation to Florida then and enjoy yourselves while this all blows over.

I think this is likely the main question tho? What would the difference actually have been? It would obviously be worse (mainly due to resources being overrun early all at the same time in a huge single tidal wave), but would it be to the extent that shutting down the world is much more beneficial?

Gjustaskingthequestion,don'tshootmeG

I guessed Ravishing Rick Rude, wrongly according to Cortana.

Even Germany has surrendered (again)
That's why I still think the corona cruise ship is the best snapshot of the worst case scenario: 100% tested, decent sample size @700, older demographic, and enclosed damp system ideal for infection --> 1% death rate+2% survived after intensive care.

Interesting. We now have Santa Clara County, CA, USA, and Los Angeles studies saying the infection rate may be 50 to 100 times higher than previously thought, making the mortality rate about 0.1%, about the same as the flu.

Two comments/questions:

One, are we sure the antibody tests are accurate (not to ensure immunity, but simply to ensure the person was infected with COVID-19)?

Two, even if the mortality rate turns out to be as low as the flu, should we be more worried about COVID-19, simply because it may be much more readily transmitted (e.g., will 95% of the population get COVID-19, while only, e.g., 30% of the population gets the flu each year - I don't know the numbers, making up numbers to pose the question)?

So the thing that gets me other than the way this is transmitted and the scary speed with which your lungs get F'd as compared to the flu. Plus the fact there's no vaccine is the fact that we're 3 months in and have already surpassed the total deaths than the worst flu year we've had in recent history.

And we're not anywhere close to done infecting everyone who will get infected yet.

So while I don't know the CFR whatever it is, I would say this is much scarier than the flu.

Not sure about the lungs thing. It seems to me that mortality rate should be the concern, though I guess I can see some concern around how bad it sucks even if you don't die.

But along the not done infecting everyone lines, that goes to my question of whether COVID-19 will in the end have a much higher infection rate than the flu. I'm done googling this for now, but that would be my next question.

Re vaccine, I think all the evidence points to us being able to create one on the order of a year from now, so I don't really see that as an issue.

Spyu, [mod edit: insult scrubbed] If you want to quote me then quote my post instead of incorrectly paraphrasing it.

That post was made on March 20 when there were 309 US deaths and policy decisions were being made from pie in the sky "models" predicting 200,000 - 2,000,000 US deaths. That's looking like a pretty good betting line in hindsight even after the CDC has retroactively gone back and reclassified thousands of deaths as Covid19.

But I digress, nowhere in that post or subsequent posts am I denying Corona is serious or comparing it to the flu. What I did say is that viruses and pandemics have existed as long as humans have been alive and are a fundamental part of life and trying to "defeat" them via social distancing is asinine. They are here to stay. I also said preliminary evidence has shown this is far milder (ie: a CFR between 0.1 - 1.0%) than the Spanish flu and other flus that killed millions upon millions over the last 200 years, and should fall within the acceptable level of death (ie: rounding errors in annual mortality) for choosing a mitigation policy response like Sweden.

I then went on to say the unpopular take is that actuaries can place a dollar value on every human life and that unfortunately most people aren't worth much, and the economic destruction being brought on by an imposed lock down far outweighs the lives saved. You being the cretin you are of course with the reading comprehension level and economic intuition of a small child are oblivious to the fact that we live in a service based economy with 70% of GDP coming via personal consumption and 30 million small businesses employing over 60 million people, and that preventing the economic destruction caused by the global policy response far outweighs saving Granny from dying of Covid19 at 87 as opposed to at 88 from the flu the following year.

But that's to be expected from someone who posts a take like this...

lol you can't be serious.

That post on the jobs was obviously a parody on your take on the corona deaths killing old people.

Are you seriously that dense?

2 wks ago.

How much an increase from today?

appears to be a shade under two times point tree fiddy. u will need to convert that to a percentage tho

4 reelz

The thing that gets me is that even with an available flu vaccine there are still 12k to 60k flu deaths in the US, year after year.

How do you know we're not close to infecting everyone who will get infected yet? Are there test results that have not be widely circulated yet?

Testing At Worcester Homeless Shelter Finds 43% Positive For Coronavirus -- 17-APR-2020 A week ago.

One In Three Among Boston Homeless Have Tested Positive For Coronavirus, City Officials Say -- 07-APR-2020 Two weeks ago.

The more we test the more we find that it is already wide spread.

How many hospitals are we going to be able to keep open if we collapse the entire economy?

Well considering there were 0 cases in the US up until a couple months ago and now we're seeing over 800k, I don't think this will stop anytime soon.

With our population being over 320 million I think it's fair to say we're not done being infected yet no? Or is that too much of a leap?

I believe his point is that we're "seeing" 800k, but how many are we not seeing?

Of course, we don't know, so perhaps we should stop making assumptions and then fighting about them.