If so then there's a serious risk of bias in the results.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/19/u...ody-tests.html

^TLDR is we're being scammed by Chinese companies promising rapid/accurate antibody test results and not getting them.

What a lot of people may not want to hear is frankly the FDA, CDC, and the powers that may be, should be working with the really big test kit makers and basically ignore the rest. That's already tens of manufacturers worldwide. There just isn't enough bandwidth to review all of the rest trying to rush the market.

Could the most reliable test be coming from a small unknown startup? Sure. But we don't have time to review all of them.

With 73 deaths and 1870 cases today, it doesn't need a scientific paper to say that cases are way higher than 1870.

If they'e blood tests then setting up a quick reliable testing system should be pretty easy as long as there is one decent test (even a slow and expensive one) to provide the standards.

Ah yes, bad news for the illogical SJW plebs, even more news that the coronavirus was vastly overblown by the illogical left and other downy plebs.

Checkout the Stanford antibody study: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...iously-thought

"The study from Stanford University, which was released Friday and has yet to be peer reviewed, tested samples from 3,330 people in Santa Clara county and found the virus was 50 to 85 times more common than official figures indicated."

"That also means coronavirus is potentially much less deadly to the overall population than initially thought. As of Tuesday, the US’s coronavirus death rate was 4.1% and Stanford researchers said their findings show a death rate of just 0.12% to 0.2%."

SJWs and other plebs wrong again

in the time it took you to create this shitpost you could have read that we've discussed that study ad nauseum already

Wrong, because I just copy/pasted my response from another website. So, posting it here literally took 10 seconds.

Writing it, (the first time) took maybe 2 minutes. It would take longer than 2 minutes to sift through a bunch of drivel from plebs just to catch the couple smart people who maybe agreed with me.

And, considering my post was already written, the added cost of copying it here was 10 seconds of time.

So no, wrong

Ban worthy idiocy. Noone wants another one of these here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Moreover, plebs don't think logically. They see a problem and go, OMFG shut down! This virus is awful! And yes, the virus is bad, don't get me wrong.

But, it's massively overblown. In order to see whether or not a lockdown is worth it, you use basic cost/benefit analysis. And, from a logical view, a lockdown is only worth it in an extremely dense place, e.g. NYC and basically no where else.

Other than that, Sweden's approach is the best: social distancing and closure of big events while building temporary hospitals to deal with the surge.

Lockdowns have benefits (saving lives), but it's pleb logic to ONLY look at the benefits – you need to look at the costs as well.

SJW plebs only look at one side of the picture and not the entire picture.

response to what? were you listening to the dude's story donny?

Don't worry, it was just a starter post. Now let's have a discussion

Thirdchance,

Out of curiosity, is there a specific reason you chose this forum to present your thesis? Between OOT and the politics forum, there are several coronavirus related threads that are more active, where you could probably have a much more vigorous discussion.

Because my friend told me to post my takes here and wanted to see what you had to say about it, if you really want to know.

So let's start: the lockdown is about sacrificing people's quality of lives and freedoms so that some grandmas and a couple sick people can live. They aren't very effective, because unless the ICUs are being overrun, then these "prevented" deaths aren't "prevented" but merely "delayed." In other words, grandma will catch it eventually, so unless we delay it until there's a cure/vaccine (unlikely) she'll just die 2 months from now.

Quarantine the elderly and the sick, let everyone else catch it and live their lives, build up heard immunity

(A slight exaggeration, but you get my point)

All of your points have already been discussed multiple times in this thread. Why should anyone rehash the discussion if you're too lazy to read what's already been written.

It's been pointed out multiple times that the study you posted is flawed.

Read more, and post less.

Go on, how is it flawed?

And you can adjust for "flaws." Just double the deathrate. So, instead of ".1 to .2" it's ".3%"

Point still stands: coronavirus massively overblown.

Heard immunity = He heard about it from a meme.

What exactly is heard immunity?

*rolls eyes* Herd immunity.

Read more post less.


This is the type of guy that's always 30 minutes late for a meeting and then wants to go over everything that has already been discussed.

It's still a shitpost.

... and coming into the meeting with a large starbucks latte in hand.

Can we please ban Third Chance from BFI? He has posted 7 times and has already used "SJW" 3 times and "pleb" 7 times.

He has bragged that his first post was just a copy paste from another forum.

And when others tell him that the points have already been discussed and he can go back a few pages, he doubles down to continue to provoke others into discussion.

Thirdchance,

Your friend is correct this is a better place to have rational discussions than those other places. However, you jumped in on post #5260 of such discussions, so noone really wants to rehash what has already been talked about. If you bring something new I am sure you could get probably get a little more engagement.

The best thing to do regarding trolls is ignore them.

Wait, the "reliable" data? You mean the data that doesn't test the asymptomatic people and instead uses a FALSE denominator, one comprised only of the people who are "tested" aka the sickest?

Thirdchance,

Toothsayer might humor you. He likes spirited debates. He will probably be back when the market closes in an hour or so.