Jump to content

Discussion:2019 Novel Corona Virus (Covid19) and It's Political Ramifications #3


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Ridgerunner said:

No, the 240,000 figure was based upon a model that included the policies put forward by Dr.Fauci and Dr. Birx.   If we did nothing to mitigate the virus spread, the first model from the UK said 2.2 million would die in the U.S.

Underneath the video he said more than 50,000 have died and I replied with the figure that showed on a Google Search for the amount of deaths so far.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, StnCld316 said:

Underneath the video he said more than 50,000 have died and I replied with the figure that showed on a Google Search for the amount of deaths so far.  

Sorry, my comment was meant as an answer to Allidino's comment.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

THEHILL.COM

Several California lawmakers are pressing Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) for details on the nearly $1 billion deal for the state to receive medical masks.

 

KMPH.COM

Governor Gavin Newsom admits, California is in desperate need of masks and other protective gear to prevent the spread of coronavirus. Desperate enough, to spend $1 billion on a contract with Chinese-based firm BYD--...

 

NYPOST.COM

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is facing pushback as state lawmakers have begun demanding details of his nearly $1 billion deal to receive 200 million masks per month from a Chinese manufacturer. Just

Maybe this is why Newsom wants to keep the shutdown going in California until we get 60,000 tests per day he insists upon. Cover up this possible corruption of mask buying that we may not need if California if allowed to restart business and we get back to our lives. However, if he keeps California in lock down--he can provide the 200 million masks to the homeless people that he will create in this state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ridgerunner said:

No, the 240,000 figure was based upon a model that included the policies put forward by Dr.Fauci and Dr. Birx.   If we did nothing to mitigate the virus spread, the first model from the UK said 2.2 million would die in the U.S.

Watch the video, it shows the relevant press convergence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Alladino said:

Watch the video, it shows the relevant press convergence. 

"Relevant press convergence," what the fuck does that mean?  I watched the conferences in full when they were happening, so I don't need interpretations from the news media.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Ridgerunner said:

"Relevant press convergence," what the fuck does that mean?  I watched the conferences in full when they were happening, so I don't need interpretations from the news media.  

It was the press conference in which the experts explained (in the presence of your beloved Trump) how they interpret the models and that they want to undercut the projected values. An explanation that if you could just get over your bias for a moment, would make all the bullshit about the quality of models you've written here obsolete. But I know by now that you will continue to ignore the facts, because you are not interested in gaining knowledge or the truth. You just want to keep your bias. 

BTW, The experts have explained all this in response to questions from reporters. Which you obviously reject for the same reason that you reject the facts. You don't think for yourself, you think what is mainstrem in the Trump media bubble. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alladino said:

It was the press conference in which the experts explained (in the presence of your beloved Trump) how they interpret the models and that they want to undercut the projected values. An explanation that if you could just get over your bias for a moment, would make all the bullshit about the quality of models you've written here obsolete. But I know by now that you will continue to ignore the facts, because you are not interested in gaining knowledge or the truth. You just want to keep your bias. 

BTW, The experts have explained all this in response to questions from reporters. Which you obviously reject for the same reason that you reject the facts. You don't think for yourself, you think what is mainstrem in the Trump media bubble. 

It is laughable to hear someone as biased as you to complain about someone else being biased. You are the one who has no ability to think for himself. All you do is keep deferring to the opinions of so called experts. Maybe the experts are not so expert.  How can people who predicted 240,000 deaths when the real number will most likely be 60,000 or less still be considered to be experts? Your thinking ability is the product of a group think society.  I have yet to see you present an original idea.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been reading and researching on the reliability of the models pertaining to Covid19.  There are 5 different models with 5 far different analysis.   The USA relies mostly on Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington,  the IHME model.   It is the most conservative of the models in its current projections. Most of the epidemiologists agree that none of the models projections can be accurately relied upon, because of the data that is being used and the lack of knowledge relating to this virus.  But unfortunately, governments have to rely on something to determine a course of action. 

Courtesy of the Guardian:

The Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation in Seattle, based at the University of Washington, is the best organisation in the world at collecting data on diseases and mapping out why we fall ill. Its Global Burden of Disease study is a massive collaborative effort that is valued and used in every country. But even for such an organisation, predicting what will happen to us all as a result of Covid-19 is a tricky business.

This is a different type of model from that of the Imperial College London group advising the government, because it will constantly evolve. But even the Imperial modellers had to change their predictions some weeks ago. Famously, their changed advice persuaded the government to bring in physical distancing guidance, with towns closed for business and people staying home to reduce what, it had suddenly become apparent, would be an unacceptably high death toll.

Models are only as good as the data that goes into them. As time goes on, we will learn a lot more about the outcomes of this pandemic in countries around the world and the effectiveness of policies in mitigating the worst outcomes.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ridgerunner said:

It is laughable to hear someone as biased as you to complain about someone else being biased. You are the one who has no ability to think for himself. All you do is keep deferring to the opinions of so called experts. Maybe the experts are not so expert.  How can people who predicted 240,000 deaths when the real number will most likely be 60,000 or less still be considered to be experts? Your thinking ability is the product of a group think society.  I have yet to see you present an original idea.  

Because they're expert scientists not psychics. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Ridgerunner said:

It is laughable to hear someone as biased as you to complain about someone else being biased. You are the one who has no ability to think for himself. All you do is keep deferring to the opinions of so called experts. Maybe the experts are not so expert.  How can people who predicted 240,000 deaths when the real number will most likely be 60,000 or less still be considered to be experts? Your thinking ability is the product of a group think society.  I have yet to see you present an original idea.  

According to the latest news, this virus is not yet defeated and the pandemic is far from being under control, so who does not tell you that the prediction of 240,000 deaths in the USA is so wrong as that?

And then it is better to be mistaken on a less deadly pandemic than more deadly, don't you think?

In any case, without these predictions, perhaps the authorities would not have made the right decisions and by that fact it could have saved thousands of lives

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2020 at 3:04 PM, Ridgerunner said:

Don't know, I didn't watch the news conference that day. To me it all sounds like a big to do about nothing.

It's not as if you couldn't look it up online in a matter of seconds and
watch it any time you wanted. Makes one wonder why you choose
not to watch it.

But, even though you didn't watch it, you still comment in his defense
that it was, "...a big to-do about nothing." For those who did see it, it
was a grossly moronic thing to say and hugely irresponsible.

Then, he tried to spin a cover-up, saying it was a sarcastic question
posed to the "fake news media," which is a gargantuan lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...