3 ms·

> The California shut down has no affect on food and consumer necessity supply chains. Citation needed. If it has "no effect" then we should just get rid of wh

by m0zg 7y ago

> The California shut down has no affect on food and consumer necessity supply chains. Citation needed. If it has "no effect" then we should just get rid of whatever they shut down, since it's clearly not necessary. > We have very good numbers from Diamond Princess We don't. All the people who died there were in their 70s and 80s and had pre-existing conditions as well. And it was a single digit number. One would have to be totally statistically illiterate to extrapolate that to a country the size of United States. > 1K deaths today Yes, the slope can get pretty scary in the middle of a sigmoid. But there weren't "1K deaths today", and they are seeing gradual reduction in the number of daily new cases. This is especially encouraging given that they're doing a ton of tests now. > Are we? Yes: https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020/coronavirus-testing-by-state-chart-of-new-cases/ https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020/coronavirus-testi.... With half a million tests given so far, best I can tell we have the highest testing throughput in the world, and it keeps on increasing. It's very impressive actually. I wish we didn't fumble it so badly out of the gate, NY could be much better now if they had more reliable info earlier. What we need is serologic test to determine approximately how many people had asymptomatic COVID19. Some studies suggest there could be a ton of those, which would explain why Wuhan did not experience a second round of epidemic after lifting most of the restrictions and putting people back to work. Assuming, of course, we're not getting fake news from there.

hcknwscommenter 7y ago
"then we should just get rid of whatever they shut down, since it's clearly not necessary." That is pure nonsense. Do you suggest an economy that only includes what is "necessary?" "> We have very good numbers from Diamond Princess "We don't. All the people who died there were in their 70s and 80s and had pre-existing conditions as well. And it was a single digit number. One would have to be totally statistically illiterate to extrapolate that to a country the size of United States." Straw man much? I see you elided my whole point about using the VERY GOOD and comprehensive S. Korea numbers and also using them to extract the signal from the Diamond Princess numbers? What is your agenda here? To just confuse everyone? "gradual reduction in the number of daily new cases" What are you talking about? This is flat out wrong. We had 13K NEW cases TODAY, an all time high for the U.S. and we are certainly only getting started. The numbers have been rising every day for the past week. "With half a million tests given so far, best I can tell we have the highest testing throughput in the world" That is again, JUST PLAIN WRONG. That's .5M tests since JANUARY. Now, if we continue increasing at the rate we did this week, then we will have adequate testing in place in about two weeks. I hope that happens, but it's doubtful. Every increase has met with a new bottleneck somewhere in the chain. "which would explain why Wuhan did not experience a second round of epidemic after lifting most of the restrictions and putting people back to work" Again, what nonsense is this? Wuhan is not lifting "most" of the restrictions until April 8. They loosened a number of restrictions a few DAYS ago. The virus has an incubation time of 14 days. Are you that mathematically illiterate to see the uselessness of your already incorrect "fact?"
- m0zg 7y ago
  > We had 13K NEW cases I've misread, sorry. I thought you were talking about Italy, which is seeing a reduction in the number of daily cases. So will New York, a week or so from now. > nonsense You need to choose your words better if you expect me to discuss this with you. At the moment you seem too frightened to have a rational conversation.
  - hcknwscommenter 7y ago
    "so will new york, a week or so from now" Again, that is completely contrary to any reasonable interpretation of the data we have. In other words nonsense. I'll check back in a week and see if you are capable of having a rational, fact-based, conversation.

by m0zg 7y ago

hcknwscommenter 7y ago

"then we should just get rid of whatever they shut down, since it's clearly not necessary." That is pure nonsense. Do you suggest an economy that only includes what is "necessary?" "> We have very good numbers from Diamond Princess "We don't. All the people who died there were in their 70s and 80s and had pre-existing conditions as well. And it was a single digit number. One would have to be totally statistically illiterate to extrapolate that to a country the size of United States." Straw man much? I see you elided my whole point about using the VERY GOOD and comprehensive S. Korea numbers and also using them to extract the signal from the Diamond Princess numbers? What is your agenda here? To just confuse everyone? "gradual reduction in the number of daily new cases" What are you talking about? This is flat out wrong. We had 13K NEW cases TODAY, an all time high for the U.S. and we are certainly only getting started. The numbers have been rising every day for the past week. "With half a million tests given so far, best I can tell we have the highest testing throughput in the world" That is again, JUST PLAIN WRONG. That's .5M tests since JANUARY. Now, if we continue increasing at the rate we did this week, then we will have adequate testing in place in about two weeks. I hope that happens, but it's doubtful. Every increase has met with a new bottleneck somewhere in the chain. "which would explain why Wuhan did not experience a second round of epidemic after lifting most of the restrictions and putting people back to work" Again, what nonsense is this? Wuhan is not lifting "most" of the restrictions until April 8. They loosened a number of restrictions a few DAYS ago. The virus has an incubation time of 14 days. Are you that mathematically illiterate to see the uselessness of your already incorrect "fact?"

m0zg 7y ago
> We had 13K NEW cases I've misread, sorry. I thought you were talking about Italy, which is seeing a reduction in the number of daily cases. So will New York, a week or so from now. > nonsense You need to choose your words better if you expect me to discuss this with you. At the moment you seem too frightened to have a rational conversation.
- hcknwscommenter 7y ago
  "so will new york, a week or so from now" Again, that is completely contrary to any reasonable interpretation of the data we have. In other words nonsense. I'll check back in a week and see if you are capable of having a rational, fact-based, conversation.