Country escapes the worst pandemic in 100 years with relative scratches, chose not to shutdown, and has it 100% under control for 4 months now and its = utter failure?

Get a gripe and stop hyperventilating.

Shuffle, how many people in the USA at current age infection rates would have to be infected in order for millions to die over the winter.

I think 1M dead for next 12 months is probably the uppermost highest range.

7000 people dead needlessly while doing worse economic damage to your country is certainly "utter failure". You can only judge against its peers (rich, small, geographically isolated especially in winter, late to have the wave come through with plenty of warning), and it has 10x the dead of its peers.

The "chose not to shutdown" isn't quite true either. Sweden is more shut down than most places if you look at activity data. There are all kinds of rules for businesses. It's rich and small so it can afford to do that.

America has averaged around 1k deaths per day throughout this summer. If you want to make the claim that there is a decent probability that deaths will average above 1k per day this winter simply because of R naught changes, that's reasonable. I don't understand how you get "millions of deaths" though. I am cautious with estimating deaths because there are different theoretical scenarios that can occur. What is the average R naught going to be throughout winter? Does the older population get infected at a higher % rate this winter comparatively speaking than they did this summer? These are the two big factors that matter when estimating deaths. The other question would be the compounding factor of the flu this winter, that is also an interesting question. Does the United States go on a lock-down, or do they not go on one this winter? I can't say definitely what the answer is to these questions, hence why I don't make predictions, different scenarios cause different outcomes.

Im just pointing out a totally apparent reality.

If Y losses way more than X and we are using that as a totally fair assessment of success/failure, Y failed.

Comparing Sweden to its geographic peers is absolutely reasonable and the correct methodology and in that regard its absolutely divergent policy response led to massively more death, double+ the DPM of all peers combined and more economic damage.

You dont get clearer failure than that however much mental gymnastic you want to perform.

OK, I'm seeing the genesis of the Shuffle's doom prognostications. Who wants to explain to Shuffle the difference between CFR and IFR, and explain to him that IFR in March - April in NY was actually 1%, not 10%?

It's too awkward for me to try and do that. He'll have to send a retraction email to his contact list (lol).

There is no one in the thread who believes this to be true. You're making **** up again, son.

That just proves you're a moron unsuited for this discussion. CFR varies wildly depending on testing levels, and testing levels were obviously very low in NY or anywhere early on. Thus your "10% CFR in NY in March" is pure meaningless bullshit, because there few tests and mostly hospitalized people got tested. That you would even use CFR from that time and extrapolate that to the future shows you have zero clue.

You tried to attack me earlier but it's you who's comically, hopelessly out of depth here and it shows. That doom email you sent will be a great embarrassment for you.

Shuffle,
I only call people names when they're both offensively stupid (ignorant and thick in a way that offends me to share the human race with them) AND they attack me first. You did both of those.

Look son, you're so far out of your depth intellectually here that it's painfully embarrassing for me to explain this to you, but here are some facts:

- More than 4 million people caught corona in New York (out of 20 million population), nearly all them in the cold/winter conditions first wave. This is a cold hard fact.
- 33,000 of these people died

That's a less than 1% death rate. Your whole premise of "millions dead over winter" is based on the pure utter bullshit belief you have that corona had a 10% date rate in NY in winter.

The millions you predict dying in the US this winter from corona this winter is not possible. The only time this was ever possible was in the first wave if they didn't lock down and let hospitals overwhelm many times over. They didn't do that and were never going to. And the US is in a far better position going into this winter than the last corona wave. It will spread through the population far slower due to partial immunity and greater distancing. Full monitoring is in place so there's intelligence on what to selectively lock down. Masks are everywhere. Old people know the risk. There's just no way to get to millions of deaths.

You're still arguing with me after I tell you the cold hard facts twice? WTF is wrong with you?

Like I told you twice, at least 4 million people in NY have been infected as of May. This is a fact. How are you sending out emails about millions dead while not knowing basic facts?

Here are the facts for you:



The antibody tests have been done. The result are known. It's gg bro. Infection rates by suburb range up to 50% for the suburb of Corona in Queens (this suburb had the highest infection rate in NY). For the whole state it's 20%.
True, but all the data so far shows reinfection is not a meaningful event.
There is no meaningful difference in viral conditions between April (average temp 45) and June (average temp 30). These are all winter conditions in every way that matters. Indeed, the worst deaths rates were in warmer Southern Europe - Italy and Spain got hit a lot harder than the much colder countries further north.
You are completely, with absolute certainty, wrong. Not just a little bit wrong but dickhead level wrong. And holding forth strongly and actually arguing with and insulting your intellectual better who's kindly educating you out of pure pity (and to save people your dickhead doomsday emails). Try to be less of a dickhead, ok? For your sake as well as everyone else's.

And by the way these antibody tests have been done all over the world, including in rigorous ways (Spain for example tested 80,000 people randomly, sampling all population groups). The results are that, in winter in the first wave, the death rate was approximately 1% of those infected. This 1% death rate in the winter first wave is so consistent across countries, temperatures and regions for the first wave that it's settled that this is what the death rate is in developed countries (where the average age is close to 40).

gg shuffle

gg tooth

So it's gone from "covid has a 1% death rate" to "the first wave of covid had a 1% death rate in developed countries that have an average age close to 40 (and doesn't include Iceland or most of the US or anywhere else where the stats don't match what I said in April.) Also, any one of the 1,000 scientists who disagree with me is an idiot."

I mean, just admit you were wrong. It's painless. No one will think less of you, since people on here are so polarized about anything you say anyway.

But the 1% IFR is just pure nonsense at this point. But if you are going to keep using it, please post at least one recent scientific study or opinion from a recognized authority that supports it, and stop using random data points and extrapolating a number that has no basis in reality, and only exists in your imagination.

Here's a tweet from an MIT guy who is pretty much the recognized expert on this stuff.

https://twitter.com/youyanggu/status...64375667781634

He says, specifically, that the IFR was probably 1-1.5 percent in March/April, but that the IFR for the entire US from March to May was .6 percent.

Look, you got fooled. You came up with a figure early on without knowing that IFR ALWAYS goes DOWN. And you have decided to die on that hill. Which is fine. But I have an MIT guy who is the foremost expert in the field on my side, and you have random data you have tried to compile yourself.

I know you think experts are all idiots, which is fine. But anybody who trusts you on IFR at this point is being as ignorant as you are being obtuse.

Did the Spanish flue IFR go down?

The only (very small) saving grace is that it's almost certain that Boris knows he has to do far more and probably will do it. It has been handled so incompetently that were pretty much back in early March when the public weren't ready for really tough measures until the deaths started piling up.

As long predicted, this winter is going to be hell and when it gets bad we wont have spring ready to save us. We are better prepared but have to wonder how much that will be worth as we struggle with a normal winter. Lot of luck is involved - where will we land on the mild winter, mild flu strain to severe winter, nasty flu strain roulette wheel.

Absolutely. The best scenario is bad.

One has to hope we will do a better job of protecting the vulnerable but we may be kidding ourselves. Football (UK) is making massive efforts, with effectively infinite resources to protect a small group, and the virus is still creeping in.

Your idiocy is growing tiresome. I'm talking about winter's rate in response to Shuffle talking about how bad winter is going to be. It's not a qualifier. Covid does indeed have a 1% death rate if the hospitals don't overwhelm; it soars otherwise.

We literally have antibody data from 10+ countries proving 1% IFR. It's settled that the IFR is 1%. What is so wrong in your head that this doesn't sink in for you?
So March and April was as high as 1.5%, but adding May to that dropped the entire period to 0.6%? There would have to negative deaths (people came back to life zombie style) for this to be true. If you're quoting him accurately he's a total dickhead. If you're not quoting him accurately then you're the dickhead. Which is it? I don't care enough to investigate.

The antibody results are definitive and are across 10+ countries for a 1% IFR. Against this we have what? A low death rate summer wave where the old isolate and the young party? What on Earth does that have to do with population IFR?

Nothing has changed on IFR from any of the data I'm looking at. At least 0.2% of young people still die like they did in the first wave. 10% of old old people still die. The only thing that's changed is the distribution of ages catching it thanks to summer attenuation (which has reduced R to less than 1 in vulnerable populations) and behavior (young people still do corona-spreading activities enough to still spread infection despite the lowered R). The same thing happens with other infectious diseases. There's nothing magical here; it's completely expected. I posted the March projections from the UK SAGE expert working group. Look at how the death/hospitalization rate completely flatlines in summer. This is because R goes down, and the only R>1 left is the younger who lead more active social lives. Look at the winter wave they predict. This is how respiratory diseases happen. Why are you so dense you can't grasp this?


I don't think experts are all idiots. There are good experts capable of reasoning well, and there are bad ones. Experts as a class aren't very reliable, though, and don't deserve anywhere near the respect they get. In fast moving situations they're actually a giant net negative over common sense. The only reason corona got out of control is because experts from the WHO to individual countries are worthless morons in situations like this, a net negative and worse than common sense.

You have an ax to grind because you're been made to look a royal dickhead on your claims of "herd immunity at 20%" from your T Cell trutherism, which has been shown to be comically wrong with this surge in Europe. Don't believe dumb theories and you won't fall into these traps.

Oh and jsb235, your T Cell truther theory of herd immunity at 15-20% infection (which I explained to you in detail is obviously bullshit) is dead as of today.

Why? Neighborhoods with greater than 30% immunity rates in New York are seeing a large uptick in case, which means R >> 1 despite a 30% infection rate.

This is in spite of distancing still in place and many things still being closed.

Your T Cell theory is dead. I wonder how long it will take you to admit that you were comically intellectually incompetent to believe it? Just wow at the level of intellectual incompetence you've displayed.

From the story you cited.

"After becoming the global epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic in the spring, the city has managed to bring the number of positive test results to below 1% through social distancing measures.

However, in the borough of Queens, positive cases have risen to 2.24% in Kew Gardens and 3.69% in Edgemere-Far Rockaway. In Brooklyn, officials are concerned about Williamsburg, with a 2% positive rate, and a southern part of the borough that includes Midwood, Borough Park and Bensonhurst, where the positive rate is 4.71%"

Wow. Cases are up to less than 5 percent positive in some places. Clearly this is a huge concern. And it is largely focused on one place.

“It is now clear that these signals in the south of Brooklyn have coalesced into one cluster we are calling the Ocean Parkway Cluster,” Gallahue wrote in the email.

“At this point in time, these increases could potentially evolve into more widespread community transmission and spread to other neighborhoods unless action is taken.”

So it is one cluster that could spread to other neighborhoods, but it hasn't yet. And it could turn into a massive second wave, but it hasn't yet.

Stop doing fist pumps before the ball is in the hole and you might not look so stupid over and over again.

The ball was in the hole before the T Cell theory of 15-20% herd immunity had been even suggested. The theory was impossible from the start as it was contradicted by numerous pieces of very strong data from the beginning

You were too comically stupid to see that, even when it was explained to you in detail, so I hoped that this finally would be something that even you could understand. Alas.

Let me make it simple for you:

If herd immunity is achieved at 15-20%, as per the theory you've put forward, then there cannot be increasing transmission in an area with 30+% immunity. DUCY? The point is made even stronger by the fact that this is happening when distancing is in place, masks are being worn, and many things are shut down or restricted.

I think I'll just put you on ignore. You're simply too stupid/uneducated/lacking a very basic competency in critical thinking to participate in this discussion in any meaningful or useful way.

One basic problem is that you don't understand how T cells work.

You should really research that before you start trying to engage with someone who does.

You took a position just to argue, and now you end up trying to defend it by citing evidence that has nothing to do with the topic.

There are hundreds of scientists who would love to discredit the theory of T cell immunity, yet none of them are using the data you are using to do so. That should tell you something.

That's not a basic problem. T Cells are completely irrelevant to the meaningful parts of your T Cell theory you've put forward.

The trouble is, you don't get it.

I actually have no opinion on the theory that human T Cells in about 50% have some innate immune response to corona. I'd put that somewhere in the "probable" range. There's evidence for it. It seems reasonable that it would given similar coronaviruses and spikes.

The trouble is the extrapolations you make from that which you've posted in this thread. It's those that I've been debunking. You don't realize they're hopelessly flawed and completely wrong, because you have the critical reasoning skills of a house dog.

You and the losers you listen to on Twitter have put forward the following pure nonsense theories:

1. That the T Cell response means that these 40-50% won't get or pass on corona (proven false before the theory was even posited)

2. That the T Cell response means that herd immunity is reached at 15-20% (completely false)

The two points above that you drew out that theory are completely false. You lack the basic reasoning skills to understand that. For real, you need to do a basic beginner course on critical reasoning skills - you have gaping holes in your critical thinking (child level) not to have no instantly realized that the above two are false by all the data.

The T Cell theory is meaningless in modifying what we already know. It doesn't modify current data, it is included in current data. The 1% death rate and 5% hospitalization rate includes the T Cell effect! Thus when you and the unforgivable moron scientists you read on Twitter say herd immunity will be reached at 20%, they're double counting.

Now that this has been spoon fed to your comical idiocy, go back and reread my posts and understand them. Let me know when the lightbulb goes on.

God stupid people tilt me. I really have to put you on ignore. And for ****s sake take a beginner critical reasoning course, preferably one for children so you can get the basics down which you somehow never picked up by osmosis. You waste everyone's time with your comical lack of reasoning skills.

There is really strong evidence that a very significant percentage (a number that varies by region for sure) of the human population has effective T-cell immunity, or at least very strong resistance.

We have lab tests showing pre-Covid blood samples having effective immunity.

We have numerous cities’ infection rates starting to plateau around 20-30% infection rate.

This is not herd “immunity” necessarily and our experience with other strands of coronavirus and common flus suggest it’s more the start of an equilibrium state.

In all likelihood we will not be able to eliminate Covid-19. We can however push the equilibrium level of infections/deaths down by practicing good hygiene (masks becoming culturally normalized would be huge) and getting our flu (now plus CoV) shots. The same practices would help save many lives from the flu too.

JSB/TS,

You gentlemen seem to be overly concerned with calling one another names and proving one another wrong. The thread would benefit from both of you trying to find common intellectual ground rather than dunking on one another. The current point of dispute seems to be the impact of T-cell immunity on the future course of the virus.

Can one or both of you kindly isolate the precise dispute without the hostility?