Page 11 of 13
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed May 06, 2020 9:05 pm
by Bob
David wrote: ↑Sat May 02, 2020 10:04 am
I've know this for a while, but the actual numbers of CV19 deaths have been over exaggerated many fold. The actual morbidity rate is around 0.03%.
See my math in the Media thread.
Maybe I'M Q!!!!!!! And when I question it, it is just a distraction so you don't find me out...
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2020 12:50 pm
by David
Tucker Carlson: We were lied to about coronavirus and the mass lockdowns. Here's the proof
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker- ... aCtl74dHu8
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2020 10:46 pm
by Bob
Oh - that idiot Tucker Carlson says it and now its true....I've been saying it since the beginning.
You shouldn't need TC to tell you. And TC is just a right wing S-Stirrer. All he cares about is selling advertising on Fox and will say anything to do it. Honestly, didn't see any proof of anything other than he noted other MSM inconsistencies.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2020 9:38 am
by David
So he's an idiot for saying the same thing you've said since the beginning? Got it.
All he cares about is selling advertising by saying the same thing you've said since the beginning? Got it.
I for one find it refreshing that at least a couple of cable news sources are telling it like it is amidst the MSM cabal.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2020 4:01 pm
by Bmyers
Where is everyone getting the the death rate is at 0.03%? Are you talking globally or in the US?
Currently in the US the death rate is 5.4%. (CFR)
Don't get confused between the CFR and IFR.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2020 4:07 pm
by Bmyers
China is dealing with more outbreaks
Beijing closes food market, locks down district after new coronavirus outbreak
https://www.foxnews.com/world/beijing-f ... s-outbreak
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:56 pm
by Bob
Total people in US/Total deaths. It really is that simple.
You have to stratify this stuff multiple ways and speak extremely carefully. No one cares about the ifs except one: What are my overall chances to die of Corona? Around 300 Million of which 100k died. .03%
Now the stratifications of interest here include:
What are my chances of getting it?
What are my chances of having symptoms
What are the chances of the symptoms causing me to seek treatment
What are the chances of it resulting in hospitalization
What are the chances of significant damage from it
What are the chances that I die of it.
You are talking about 5% death from the last three. Yeah - about triple that of Flu (which happened also - but datas this year useless because COVID intermingled).
And - just for fun...then stratify EACH of those by decade of life. .03% is way high for a lot of people. A very very important statistic is called "Years of life lost". When something kills you at 78 - you hit the target and we don;'t get excited about it. When you find something that kills you at 58...you had 20 years (on average) left. That is concerning.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:56 pm
by bdcochran
Chicago survey:
1. 80% of the people had TWO or more underlying conditions.
2. Nearly all the deaths were age 60 and up.
3. Despite earlier concerns, having previous flu shots was a small plus.
4. There was a correlation between dark skin and deaths.
5. A vitamin D deficiency test is covered by medi-care programs. Otherwise, a home test and sending to the lab is about $50.
6. The tests to determine if you have the virus is dumb because you can be negative today and infected tomorrow.
As one physician said, you are just having the die off that would have occurred within the next two years of people with underlying conditions.
7. The average stay of a man in a long term rest home is only 3 months.
8. When you live in a country where infected people are deliberately put into rest homes, you will have a problem, Gov. Cuomo.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:10 am
by Bob
There will bet no serious post analysis of this. IF that is all true, more or less, do you close anything and impose distance rules?
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2020 2:41 pm
by Bmyers
Bob wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:56 pm
Total people in US/Total deaths. It really is that simple.
You have to stratify this stuff multiple ways and speak extremely carefully. No one cares about the ifs except one: What are my overall chances to die of Corona? Around 300 Million of which 100k died. .03%
Now the stratifications of interest here include:
What are my chances of getting it?
What are my chances of having symptoms
What are the chances of the symptoms causing me to seek treatment
What are the chances of it resulting in hospitalization
What are the chances of significant damage from it
What are the chances that I die of it.
You are talking about 5% death from the last three. Yeah - about triple that of Flu (which happened also - but datas this year useless because COVID intermingled).
And - just for fun...then stratify EACH of those by decade of life. .03% is way high for a lot of people. A very very important statistic is called "Years of life lost". When something kills you at 78 - you hit the target and we don;'t get excited about it. When you find something that kills you at 58...you had 20 years (on average) left. That is concerning.
You may think it is that simple, but that is not how the death rate is calculated. In addition, as I have pointed out, there are different death rates. Crossing between the different terms and using them interchangebly leads to wrong conclusions and incorrect science. Politicians are very good at doing just that and you can see where that has gotten us.