When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
No cabin fever here. Just came back from a walk in the Ohio "sunshine." We don't get lots of sunshine in N.E. Ohio. They always say it has something to do with the Lake Erie effect and yada yada. "Nice shoes" is a inside joke to me. It's an ice breaker that I've used with success over the decades. Got to keep a sense of humor.
I guess I am more to the point. Smile and let my eye get as big as possible, as I look at her chest. And say we can have a lot of fun with them! Works for me.
(1) A map with (IMO) more meaningful statistics (below) e.g. total sampling versus confirmed cases by state and county (United States). I will provide additional links (below).
(2) There are several areas of the site to explore i.e. full map view, state-by-state statistics broken down into counties.
[QUOTE=HighwayStar 442;12354963,295,000 dead possible.[/QUOTE]
That is incorrect.
If you extrapolate the numbers you must first assume you have sampled the entire population of the United States (329,500,000).
If you assume the entire United States population (329,500,000 = N) as the sampling size, what % would result in confirmed cases?
(329,500,00 x 0.0017) = 560,150 = Confirmed Cases
Out of 560,150 Confirmed Cases, what percentage would result in death?
(560,150 x 0.0134) = 7,506 mortality
Norm, I hate to start an argument here but, Why is the % sampled such an important number/
People who don't show any symptoms, Shouldn't be tested Right ?
Absolutely incorrect. People who don't show symptoms can still carry and transmit the virus. This is just like the anti-vaxxer morons. And given the dismal rate of testing in the US, we have no idea how many people really have it. It could be 35,000 or it could be 350,000. There is no way to know without testing - all we do know is that the number of cases in the US doubles every two days. How would you feel if someone who didn't exhibit symptoms and thus didn't take precautions went out and infected you or your parents? I suspect that a large number of the members here are in the group most at risk (older and with health issues). The fact that the administration has been lying about this to the public for two months should really **** you off. And we can't provide enough supplies to our own people, but Commander Bone Spurs offers help to North Korea. SERIOUSLY???
China has had nearly no new cases in the last couple of weeks. South Korea, which implemented a very aggressive testing regimen, has similarly seen cases level off. All other countries are on an exponential growth trajectory. This is why people should have stayed awake in math class.
I'll add that while the infection and mortality rates may appear small, the real thing people need to be concerned about is that the economy will crater. Expect unemployment to hit 20%, and if you're out of work for two or three months, or if the company you work for goes out of business, that $1200 check will be meaningless.
Norm, I hate to start an argument here but, Why is the % sampled such an important number/
People who don't show any symptoms, Shouldn't be tested Right ?
James - The % sampled is the most significant number in determining the mortality.
(n/N) = Where N is the entire sampling size and n is the the number effected.
Example: Total number of Oldsmobiles produced in the world = N (35,000,000)
Total Number of Oldsmobiles produced in the world with faulty front brakes = n (35,000)
If you sampled all Oldsmobiles produced in the world, your entire sampling size would be N
If your sampling determined that 35,000 (n) vehicles had faulty brakes, you can determine that:
(n/N) = ratio (%) Therefore, (35,000/35,000,000) x (100) = 1%
1% of 35,000,000 Oldsmobiles were produced w/ faulty brakes.
Regarding sampling. The sampling has been atrocious and terrible. It would be FAR, FAR, FAR better to sample as much of the entire population to arrive at meaningful numbers. Currently, (again) our sampling is ridiculously pathetic. I can understand the need to determine what pressure is being put on our health care system, but we seriously do not have adequate sampling. The sampling statistics provided by the CDC are absolutely the most pathetic. What is FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR, FAR worst is this.
We have absolutely ZERO - that is NADA, ZILCH, NONE, NO uniform structure of reporting health care data. States, localities are NOT - I repeat NOT reporting data in ANY meaningful uniform manner to make data analysis meaningful. Our health care system is, IMO, incapable of performing the most simplest of all manners of testing and reporting significant data - there is, again - NO, absolutely NO uniform measure of compiling and reporting statistical data - which is pathetic.
Last edited by Vintage Chief; March 23rd, 2020 at 06:27 AM.
I have a nephew in Portland who got something and wanted to be tested,
The powers that be said, We won't test you because you don't have all of the symptoms .
He said, " If I had all of the symptoms, I wouldn't need testing"
That's exactly the problem. The dearth of test kits has forced hospitals to restrict testing to only the most severe cases, which is kind of stupid. To extend Norm's Oldsmobile brake analogy, that's like the BRAKE light on your dash - it lights up shortly AFTER your foot goes all the way to the floor and you exclaim OH $HIT!
I agree with Koda. The only way we'll ever know the "N" in Norm's equation is if we test the ENTIRE WORLD. We're never going to do that. We're not going to test the entire U.S. population. We'll never know for sure how many people would test positive. We didn't know it for SARS or H1N1 or ebola or anything else, and we're not going to know it now.
This comment from Joe Padavano is useless:
How would you feel if someone who didn't exhibit symptoms and thus didn't take precautions went out and infected you or your parents?
I would feel terrible, but so what? I would also feel terrible if someone who has a cold or the seasonal flu infects me or my parents. But it happens all the time. That's the nature of contagious disease. If people don't exhibit symptoms, they're not going to be tested! Every day our local paper says just this. "Don't try to get tested if you don't have symptoms. This is allergy season, too, so having the sniffles or a cough isn't enough of a reason to get tested." With this kind of advice being put out there by the health experts, there is no way we will test everyone. Therefore we will NEVER KNOW who's carrying the disease and who's not, and we'll never know what the "N" is in Norm's equation.
If the N is far larger than we know, which everyone seems to think it is, while the "n" is pretty much known (we can track pretty well how many people die from it), this means that the death rate is far smaller than we are now measuring. This is good! This could put the death rate down into the range of the typical seasonal flu, which kills 30,000 to 60,000 in the U.S. annually and which we never bat an eyelash at.
Last edited by jaunty75; March 23rd, 2020 at 07:41 AM.
I don't understand why the testing is so important if people are already staying away from other people. What would it change?
Because they are NOT staying away. Look at the morons on spring break in Florida. The numbers don't lie. In South Korea, where the population density is much higher than it is here (thus increasing the likelihood of transfer), widespread testing and identification has allowed appropriate measures to be implemented, and the spread has pretty much been halted there. The rate of new cases in the US will surpass those in China by Wednesday. By this time next week, US cases will be close to 1,000,000. Do the math people.
Right from today's (March 23) edition of our local paper. Asymptomatic people are not going to be tested. We will not know if someone is carrying the disease but showing no symptoms until and unless they actually start showing symptoms to a large enough degree that the heath people will agree to test them.
Right from today's (March 23) edition of our local paper. Asymptomatic people are not going to be tested. We will not know if someone is carrying the disease but showing no symptoms until and unless they actually start showing symptoms to a large enough degree that the heath people will agree to test them.
And again, that's because there are not enough test kits. It's not that they "do not need to be tested", it's because the medical professionals have decreed that the few test kits should only be used on people with the most severe symptoms.
Math can be twisted in all sorts of ways but this is what I look at as well
Math is math. If there are 35K cases in the US today, there WILL be 70K by Wednesday, 140K by Friday, 280K by Sunday, and over half a million in a week.
And just to be clear, I am NOT looking at the mortality rate. What I am looking at is the effect this has on the economy. United just suspended 95% of their flights to Europe. Others will follow suit. Expect layoffs in the next few days - airline employees, airport employees, etc. The shops in the airport close, and those workers get laid off. They don't buy any goods, so what happens to their suppliers? And that's just one small example. This is a really big deal, economically.
1. How could we have been better prepared, made better calls on this?
2. What can we do better now?
This is not a good situation. The further you lock down the country, the better for the virus prevention, but the more people will be impacted by the economic devastation.
1. How could we have been better prepared, made better calls on this?
2. What can we do better now?
This is not a good situation. The further you lock down the country, the better for the virus prevention, but the more people will be impacted by the economic devastation.
Your second question is the important one. The first question is sort of too late now. And yes, your conclusion hits the nail exactly on the head.
So what if they mass test? They are just sending the vast majority of people that have it home to wait it out. They would have been better off just staying home to start with unless they had a condition that is making it worse or are elderly.
I agree with Koda. The only way we'll ever know the "N" in Norm's equation is if we test the ENTIRE WORLD. We're never going to do that. We're not going to test the entire U.S. population. We'll never know for sure how many people would test positive. We didn't know it for SARS or H1N1 or ebola or anything else, and we're not going to know it now.
This comment from Joe Padavano is useless:
How would you feel if someone who didn't exhibit symptoms and thus didn't take precautions went out and infected you or your parents?
I would feel terrible, but so what? I would also feel terrible if someone who has a cold or the seasonal flu infects me or my parents. But it happens all the time. That's the nature of contagious disease. If people don't exhibit symptoms, they're not going to be tested! Every day our local paper says just this. "Don't try to get tested if you don't have symptoms. This is allergy season, too, so having the sniffles or a cough isn't enough of a reason to get tested." With this kind of advice being put out there by the health experts, there is no way we will test everyone. Therefore we will NEVER KNOW who's carrying the disease and who's not, and we'll never know what the "N" is in Norm's equation.
If the N is far larger than we know, which everyone seems to think it is, while the "n" is pretty much known (we can track pretty well how many people die from it), this means that the death rate is far smaller than we are now measuring. This is good! This could put the death rate down into the range of the typical seasonal flu, which kills 30,000 to 60,000 in the U.S. annually and which we never bat an eyelash at.
Wichita head cop goes on tv news. No plans he is aware of shutting down Wichita.He is a peon. My guess is 30 days of less and it will be shut down. Jmo
State health leaders are advising people with mild symptoms to stay home and said not to go to an emergency room unless the situation is an emergency. They said positive tests won’t change treatment for patients in the absence of serious symptoms.
Only time will tell if the country did the right thing or not as hindsight is always 20/20. To compound things you have Russia and OPEC effing around with oil supply which will decimate the oil production in this country. Then we decide that the only thing left to do is throw pile of money (in the trillions of dollars) around and cut interest rates to nothing thinking this will cure everything, yet Social Security is still sorely underfunded. Unemployment in this country is going to go through the roof, businesses are going to fail, go bankrupt, and close. As far as destroying the economy, that horse has already left the barn and its going to get a lot worse.
March 22nd, 2020, 01:22 PM
