5 ms·

> So how exactly is Elon opening his factory consisting of young employees with easy social distancing worse than what Fauci says? It's much easier to stay at a

> So how exactly is Elon opening his factory consisting of young employees with easy social distancing worse than what Fauci says? It's much easier to stay at a distance and wear masks at a factory than on a cruise ship. He even states that those who are afraid aren't required to come. Only those who want can come and work. How is there anything wrong? I just don't get it. I’ve never heard anything about factories only employing healthy young people. That sounds like age discrimination, so if Elon is doing that he could also be reported. The people who are staying home are being threatened with loss of pay and unemployment insurance. Have you read any of the news articles about the workers who have died at meatpacking plants because their managers pushed them to keep coming in and then the whole plant got infected? > Fauci, WHO, modelers etc whose only job is to make predictions on these sort of things have been consistently wrong and yet people are willing to take their advice as gospel. Wrong in the wrong direction. They underpredicted how bad this would be. The White House including Fauci was touting the IHME model of 60,000 deaths from the virus by august 1st, we are already at 80,000 deaths and rising fast. Same for other modelers, e.g. Imperial College who predicted 20,000 deaths in the UK with lockdown and the UK has already hit 40,000 deaths. Doesn’t exactly cause me to think Elon is more trustworthy. Everything he’s sharing and pushing online has been to downplay the threat of the virus even more than our governments have. I think he obviously cares a lot more about his factory and making money than he does about the virus.

busymom0 6y ago
I think you are being disingenuous on purpose because you are always giving benefit of the doubt to people like Fauci, Imperial College, WHO etc while not providing the same to people like Elon and my comment. > I’ve never heard anything about factories only employing healthy young people. That sounds like age discrimination, so if Elon is doing that he could also be reported. You are being disingenuous here because it's obvious that most employees are under 60-65 years old anyway in workforce. Age of Tesla and SpaceX employees is quite young: > While the median age is also lower than the average though closer to the pack with 29 for SpaceX and 30 for Tesla. https://electrek.co/2016/03/07/tesla-and-spacex-standout-in-tech-employee-survey-for-the-most-stressful-and-lowest-paying-jobs-but-also-most-meaningful/ https://electrek.co/2016/03/07/tesla-and-spacex-standout-in-... While 80% of US coronavirus deaths have been among people 65 and older: https://www.businessinsider.com/most-us-coronavirus-deaths-ages-65-older-cdc-report-2020-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/most-us-coronavirus-deaths-a... > because their managers pushed them to keep coming in and then the whole plant got infected Again, you are being disingenuous because neither Elon, nor my comment said he's pushing people to come in. In my parent comment I specifically stated this but seems like you either ignored it or are being insincere: "He even states that those who are afraid aren't required to come. Only those who want can come and work. How is there anything wrong?" > Wrong in the wrong direction. They underpredicted how bad this would b Again, being disingenuous. You specifically used the example of the revised IHME model of 60,000 deaths and not the one which they predicted before that where they predicted 510,000 deaths in G.B. and 2.2 million in the U.S. The 60,000 deaths prediction also stated the range to be between 31,221 and 126,703. Neil Ferguson, the modelers of the Imperial College model was recently caught and caused him to resign because despite being infected himself, he wasn't following his own quarantine guidelines and was sleeping with a mistress: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/05/exclusive-government-scientist-neil-ferguson-resigns-breaking/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/05/exclusive-govern... The same Imperial College's Neil Ferguson has been consistently wrong about many predictions: > [Imperial College epidemiologist Neil] Ferguson was behind the disputed research that sparked the mass culling of eleven million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that up to 150,000 people could die. There were fewer than 200 deaths. . . . > In 2002, Ferguson predicted that up to 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from BSE. > In 2005, Ferguson predicted that up to 150 million people could be killed from bird flu. In the end, only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009. > In 2009, a government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a “reasonable worst-case scenario” was that the swine flu would lead to 65,000 British deaths. In the end, swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K. > Last March, Ferguson admitted that his Imperial College model of the COVID-19 disease was based on undocumented, 13-year-old computer code that was intended to be used for a feared influenza pandemic, rather than a coronavirus. Ferguson declined to release his original code so other scientists could check his results. He only released a heavily revised set of code last week, after a six-week delay. https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/05/08/so-the-real-scandal-is-why-did-anyone-ever-listen-to-this-guy/ https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/05/08/so-the-rea... CDC has specifically stated that this is similar to "a recent high severity flu season": https://www.facebook.com/CDC/posts/10157900783181026 https://www.facebook.com/CDC/posts/10157900783181026 > According to the latest CDC COVIDView report, increases in hospitalization rates for COVID-19, which are cumulative, have started to level off. The hospitalization rate is highest among adults 65 and older and similar to what has been seen during a comparable time period during a recent high severity flu season We cannot just keep everything shut down forever when a large majority of deaths are in older than 65 years and people with pre-existing health conditions. Because of these draconian lockdowns, the number of suicides, mental health related issues, suicide hotlines have exploded, child abuse and domestic abuse is skyrocketing, people with other health conditions including cancer diagnosis are going undiagnosed. Doesn't even mention the millions of people jobless, losing their business and unable to afford food. The UN says that 130 MILLION people worldwide could be on the brink of starvation by the end of 2020 due to coronavirus lockdown. They predict that 300,000 could die every day over a 3 month period if people are not able to get the help they need. Tell me more about why we need to stay locked down: https://web.archive.org/web/20200501032211/https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-chief-warns-hunger-pandemic-covid-19-spreads-statement-un-security-council https://web.archive.org/web/20200501032211/https://www.wfp.o... Have you looked at the numbers of how many deaths per year we have from cigarettes, flu and pneumonia, car accidents etc? Should we ban cigarettes and driving too until there are zero deaths?
- javagram 6y ago
  > Again, being disingenuous. You specifically used the example of the revised IHME model of 60,000 deaths and not the one which they predicted before that where they predicted 510,000 deaths in G.B. and 2.2 million in the U.S. Wrong. The numbers you are quoting are Imperial college predictions, not IHME. And those predictions are for a ZERO mitigation strategy where the disease runs through the entire population to achieve herd immunity (i.e. what humans used to do before disease theory was understood during smallpox epidemics or the Black Death). They are non-falsifiable because we didn’t actually try such a strategy. I’m wondering if you didn’t read the paper yourself because I’ve seen these numbers flying around and invariably people are getting the info from secondary sources who misrepresent it. You can see the actual paper you’re referring to here (and have mistakenly cited as IHME). https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/m... “ In total, in an unmitigated epidemic, we would predict approximately 510,000 deaths in GB and 2.2 million in the US, not accounting for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed on mortality.” They go onto model interventions such as closing restaurants, schools, isolating over-70s, and so on, all of which they predict would lead to significantly less death toll - you can see the figures yourself. And you can see from this early April article that their model in fact far underpredicted the number of deaths from an intervention strategy. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-ferguson/uk-coronavirus-deaths-could-reach-7000-to-20000-ferguson-idUSKBN21N0BN https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britai... > LONDON (Reuters) - UK deaths from the coronavirus could rise to between about 7,000 and 20,000 under measures taken to slow the spread of the virus, Neil Ferguson, a professor at Imperial College in London who has helped shape the government’s response, said on Sunday. The IHME model, on the other hand, never had these numbers. You can see the IHME model dating to March 25, 2020 at http://www.healthdata.org/sites/default/files/files/research_articles/2020/COVID-forecasting-03252020_4.pdf http://www.healthdata.org/sites/default/files/files/research... > We estimate 81,114 (95% UI 38,242 to 162,106) deaths in the United States from COVID-19 over the next 4 months. In just two months, we’ve already passed over their prediction of 81k deaths in the USA. You’ve posted a lot so I don’t want to respond to everything because I don’ think this will convince you, but if you actually look up the “predictions” referenced in that Telegraph article you’ll understand it misrepresents Ferguson’s quotes. For instance, the death estimate from bird flue was only if that strain jumped over to be easily human-to-human transmissible, which it never has. The prediction for BSE was 50 to 500k, which is admittedly a pretty large range but the final number of 177 fell within it. The “reasonable worst-case scenario” for swine flu was explicitly a worst-case scenario - not a prediction of what was actually going to happen. Obviously there were non-worst-case scenarios too. It turned out H1N1 wasn’t as dangerous as some early estimates predicted. As far as Ferguson’s code having problems, seems like it. But again, his model significantly underpredicted how dangerous COVID-19 would be if we responded using NPIs, so pointing to it and other models as the problem makes no sense. Cigarettes and driving aren’t contagious - cigarettes barely affect anyone else via second-hand smoke and we spend enormous sums of money on making driving safer every year. Obviously there is a cost-benefit calculation to be made in everything. COVID-19 is getting a much stronger response than flu because it is so much more deadly than the flu or common cold viruses.

busymom0 6y ago

I think you are being disingenuous on purpose because you are always giving benefit of the doubt to people like Fauci, Imperial College, WHO etc while not providing the same to people like Elon and my comment. > I’ve never heard anything about factories only employing healthy young people. That sounds like age discrimination, so if Elon is doing that he could also be reported. You are being disingenuous here because it's obvious that most employees are under 60-65 years old anyway in workforce. Age of Tesla and SpaceX employees is quite young: > While the median age is also lower than the average though closer to the pack with 29 for SpaceX and 30 for Tesla. https://electrek.co/2016/03/07/tesla-and-spacex-standout-in-tech-employee-survey-for-the-most-stressful-and-lowest-paying-jobs-but-also-most-meaningful/ https://electrek.co/2016/03/07/tesla-and-spacex-standout-in-... While 80% of US coronavirus deaths have been among people 65 and older: https://www.businessinsider.com/most-us-coronavirus-deaths-ages-65-older-cdc-report-2020-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/most-us-coronavirus-deaths-a... > because their managers pushed them to keep coming in and then the whole plant got infected Again, you are being disingenuous because neither Elon, nor my comment said he's pushing people to come in. In my parent comment I specifically stated this but seems like you either ignored it or are being insincere: "He even states that those who are afraid aren't required to come. Only those who want can come and work. How is there anything wrong?" > Wrong in the wrong direction. They underpredicted how bad this would b Again, being disingenuous. You specifically used the example of the revised IHME model of 60,000 deaths and not the one which they predicted before that where they predicted 510,000 deaths in G.B. and 2.2 million in the U.S. The 60,000 deaths prediction also stated the range to be between 31,221 and 126,703. Neil Ferguson, the modelers of the Imperial College model was recently caught and caused him to resign because despite being infected himself, he wasn't following his own quarantine guidelines and was sleeping with a mistress: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/05/exclusive-government-scientist-neil-ferguson-resigns-breaking/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/05/exclusive-govern... The same Imperial College's Neil Ferguson has been consistently wrong about many predictions: > [Imperial College epidemiologist Neil] Ferguson was behind the disputed research that sparked the mass culling of eleven million sheep and cattle during the 2001 outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. He also predicted that up to 150,000 people could die. There were fewer than 200 deaths. . . . > In 2002, Ferguson predicted that up to 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef. In the U.K., there were only 177 deaths from BSE. > In 2005, Ferguson predicted that up to 150 million people could be killed from bird flu. In the end, only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009. > In 2009, a government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a “reasonable worst-case scenario” was that the swine flu would lead to 65,000 British deaths. In the end, swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K. > Last March, Ferguson admitted that his Imperial College model of the COVID-19 disease was based on undocumented, 13-year-old computer code that was intended to be used for a feared influenza pandemic, rather than a coronavirus. Ferguson declined to release his original code so other scientists could check his results. He only released a heavily revised set of code last week, after a six-week delay. https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/05/08/so-the-real-scandal-is-why-did-anyone-ever-listen-to-this-guy/ https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/05/08/so-the-rea... CDC has specifically stated that this is similar to "a recent high severity flu season": https://www.facebook.com/CDC/posts/10157900783181026 https://www.facebook.com/CDC/posts/10157900783181026 > According to the latest CDC COVIDView report, increases in hospitalization rates for COVID-19, which are cumulative, have started to level off. The hospitalization rate is highest among adults 65 and older and similar to what has been seen during a comparable time period during a recent high severity flu season We cannot just keep everything shut down forever when a large majority of deaths are in older than 65 years and people with pre-existing health conditions. Because of these draconian lockdowns, the number of suicides, mental health related issues, suicide hotlines have exploded, child abuse and domestic abuse is skyrocketing, people with other health conditions including cancer diagnosis are going undiagnosed. Doesn't even mention the millions of people jobless, losing their business and unable to afford food. The UN says that 130 MILLION people worldwide could be on the brink of starvation by the end of 2020 due to coronavirus lockdown. They predict that 300,000 could die every day over a 3 month period if people are not able to get the help they need. Tell me more about why we need to stay locked down: https://web.archive.org/web/20200501032211/https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-chief-warns-hunger-pandemic-covid-19-spreads-statement-un-security-council https://web.archive.org/web/20200501032211/https://www.wfp.o... Have you looked at the numbers of how many deaths per year we have from cigarettes, flu and pneumonia, car accidents etc? Should we ban cigarettes and driving too until there are zero deaths?

javagram 6y ago
> Again, being disingenuous. You specifically used the example of the revised IHME model of 60,000 deaths and not the one which they predicted before that where they predicted 510,000 deaths in G.B. and 2.2 million in the U.S. Wrong. The numbers you are quoting are Imperial college predictions, not IHME. And those predictions are for a ZERO mitigation strategy where the disease runs through the entire population to achieve herd immunity (i.e. what humans used to do before disease theory was understood during smallpox epidemics or the Black Death). They are non-falsifiable because we didn’t actually try such a strategy. I’m wondering if you didn’t read the paper yourself because I’ve seen these numbers flying around and invariably people are getting the info from secondary sources who misrepresent it. You can see the actual paper you’re referring to here (and have mistakenly cited as IHME). https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/m... “ In total, in an unmitigated epidemic, we would predict approximately 510,000 deaths in GB and 2.2 million in the US, not accounting for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed on mortality.” They go onto model interventions such as closing restaurants, schools, isolating over-70s, and so on, all of which they predict would lead to significantly less death toll - you can see the figures yourself. And you can see from this early April article that their model in fact far underpredicted the number of deaths from an intervention strategy. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-ferguson/uk-coronavirus-deaths-could-reach-7000-to-20000-ferguson-idUSKBN21N0BN https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britai... > LONDON (Reuters) - UK deaths from the coronavirus could rise to between about 7,000 and 20,000 under measures taken to slow the spread of the virus, Neil Ferguson, a professor at Imperial College in London who has helped shape the government’s response, said on Sunday. The IHME model, on the other hand, never had these numbers. You can see the IHME model dating to March 25, 2020 at http://www.healthdata.org/sites/default/files/files/research_articles/2020/COVID-forecasting-03252020_4.pdf http://www.healthdata.org/sites/default/files/files/research... > We estimate 81,114 (95% UI 38,242 to 162,106) deaths in the United States from COVID-19 over the next 4 months. In just two months, we’ve already passed over their prediction of 81k deaths in the USA. You’ve posted a lot so I don’t want to respond to everything because I don’ think this will convince you, but if you actually look up the “predictions” referenced in that Telegraph article you’ll understand it misrepresents Ferguson’s quotes. For instance, the death estimate from bird flue was only if that strain jumped over to be easily human-to-human transmissible, which it never has. The prediction for BSE was 50 to 500k, which is admittedly a pretty large range but the final number of 177 fell within it. The “reasonable worst-case scenario” for swine flu was explicitly a worst-case scenario - not a prediction of what was actually going to happen. Obviously there were non-worst-case scenarios too. It turned out H1N1 wasn’t as dangerous as some early estimates predicted. As far as Ferguson’s code having problems, seems like it. But again, his model significantly underpredicted how dangerous COVID-19 would be if we responded using NPIs, so pointing to it and other models as the problem makes no sense. Cigarettes and driving aren’t contagious - cigarettes barely affect anyone else via second-hand smoke and we spend enormous sums of money on making driving safer every year. Obviously there is a cost-benefit calculation to be made in everything. COVID-19 is getting a much stronger response than flu because it is so much more deadly than the flu or common cold viruses.