Virus Impact on CP

Jeff said:

MaverickLaunch said:

There is growing evidence out there that the mitigation efforts (read: lockdown) are no more effective than far less stringent measures.

False. You can't just make stuff up and declare it true.

And in much the same way, you can’t declare someone’s statements “false” and maintain any credibility without fact to substantiate that position. My statement was based on fact. Look at the growth rates and infection of the states that did not enact a lockdown vs those that did. Especially my home state of Michigan which was early to lock down yet has had some of the highest infection rates (not to mention mortality rates) in the country.

Compare that with your state of Florida, and your governor whom you surely hate, which has had much better results despite twice the population, many of whom are elderly. These are facts. They are helpful in discussions particularly when people don’t agree.

You: This is true!
Me: Prove it.
You: You have no credibility!

You have a strange way of proving "facts."

I don't hate anyone. My governor most certainly is a moron, but not because of his party affiliation. I'll be the first to stand up and say that DeWine, also a Republican, is showing everyone how to lead in a crisis. Because politics are not an exercise in sports rivalries. But let's not deflect from your falsehoods.

Michigan's infection rate has very obviously been effected by poverty, in the same way that the rural south has. The per capita rates are crazy high where people are poor, especially poor people of color, and crazy low everywhere else.

Florida is a huge state, and in many ways, three states. South Florida has been anything but a success, with per capita infection rates like 374/100k in Miami-Dade. It's getting scarier in places like Sumter, the oldest average age county, where The Villages are, as they've seen a sudden spike in infections among the retiree golf cart crowd. So your bull**** generalization about the state is completely wrong,

There is zero evidence that restricting movement and enforcing social distancing is ineffective. Zero. You'll not find any reputable epidemiologist assert that it is ineffective, because it just ain't true.

How's that NYT proof of lies coming?

MaverickLaunch said:

There is growing evidence out there that the mitigation efforts (read: lockdown) are no more effective than far less stringent measures. Look at the data for the states that have not mandated stay at home orders.

What data specifically? And how are you accounting for other factors (population density, demographics, climate, etc.) when analyzing that data to come to your conclusion that flies in the face of the overwhelming scientific consensus?

When you look at states that have had high numbers of cases and have implemented stay at home orders (MI, NY, NJ, etc.), you can see the impact these orders had on the spread, flattening the infamous curve. Look at "Cases by state", then "Map" for specific states. The change in the curves is plain as day. That there may be outliers does not prove anything, especially in the absence of data for your argument.

We don't have enough data to understand what the "new normal" will look like, much less when we can get there. We need an enormous increase in testing infrastructure at the absolute minimum in order to being to slowly open things back up to see what effect this has on the R value.

But the good news is that a large majority of Americans side with the experts on this. Yes, you saw a few thousand folks protesting these stay at home orders at events funded by political groups. What you didn't see is the many millions of Americans complying with them, because they trust the experts.

Çp4€và04 said:

Wow. 46k+ dead in roughly a month. But that doesn't matter because the numbers are "Padded". What number would tickle yer compassion gland? 100k? 200k? Maybe a Million?

Fascinating.

Sorry, brother. Running on logic, not emotion.
Condolences to all affected.

The point I'm trying to make is that misinformation led us to commit economic suicide. We have already crippled millions and spent trillions, in hopes of saving the lives of a few.
This shut down was a mistake, and we need to end it before it does any more damage.

Which misinformation was that? You've seen what delayed reaction has done to economies, right? Can you find the economists that suggest non-mitigation of a pandemic results in better economic outcomes? Not only is there no research to suggest that's the case, but history had demonstrated the exact opposite. The economic toll of the 1918 pandemic was far higher for those cities that did not act, or acted more slowly.

Well, Sweden's approach has been interesting and they seem to be reaching herd immunity with higher cases per capita, yes, but a much better outcome overall.

I do not believe that a vaccine will be effective, to my knowledge there has never been an effective vaccine for coronavirus (SARS, MERS, common cold, etc). Time to let this thing run it's course before it takes down our country.

Jeff said:

You'll not find any reputable epidemiologist assert that it is ineffective, because it just ain't true.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/04/18/swedish_epidemiologist_johan_giesecke_why_lockdowns_are_the_wrong_policy.html

Does he qualify?

You're wasting your time. He speaks only in absolutes and blanket statements. There is no room for differing viewpoints, alternative facts, or open mindedness.

But seriously, there is more than one way to skin a cat, and I don't feel like we are doing it the most efficient way.

I trust the scientific and economic consensus over your feelings. You should too.

"Alternative facts" sounds like a nicer way of saying fake news. lol

Jeff said:

Which misinformation was that? You've seen what delayed reaction has done to economies, right? Can you find the economists that suggest non-mitigation of a pandemic results in better economic outcomes? Not only is there no research to suggest that's the case, but history had demonstrated the exact opposite. The economic toll of the 1918 pandemic was far higher for those cities that did not act, or acted more slowly.

Different times, different flu.
You are comparing apples to oranges.
Had the Spanish flu targeted the same demographic as COVID-19, the economic toll would have been far less.

The R0 in the 1918 was better at 1.8, compared to 2.2 for this pandemic. It's at worst a Red Delicious to Fuji comparison. What "demographic" is being targeted? The virus doesn't care about race or income or whatever.

The existence of outlier "experts" does not negate the consensus of economists and epidemiologists.

Jeff said:

Which misinformation was that? You've seen what delayed reaction has done to economies, right? Can you find the economists that suggest non-mitigation of a pandemic results in better economic outcomes? Not only is there no research to suggest that's the case, but history had demonstrated the exact opposite. The economic toll of the 1918 pandemic was far higher for those cities that did not act, or acted more slowly.

Sadly I am forced to agree. Trump is doing the right thing, while at the same time he's a master of doublespeak; that's what he's always done. Ignore it.

The shutdown sucks to be sure. Gov. Halfwit wants to shut down Mich until the end of May, this is most likely overreach but ..... Does Michigan want 10,000 deaths or 100,000 deaths? The USA can afford the shutdown and history proves it. The clean up will take a few years, but we will emerge stronger for it.

https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/the-deadly-polio-epidemic-a...oronavirus

I remember getting a Polio vaccine via a sugar cube. In time a vaccine will be developed and it will be a distant memory in 20 years.

In the meantime, barriers are the way to stop a plague.

I believe every news source is reporting the same in regards to C-19.
The death rate is highest among those 65 and over and people with underlying conditions.
So pretty much the same crowd that dies from the seasonal flu and pneumonia.

The Spanish flu was much different. Allow me to copy and paste.

----

Mortality rates from a typical influenza tend
to be the greatest for the very young and the
very old. What made the 1918 influenza
unique was that mortality rates were the highest for the segment of the population aged
18 to 40, and more so for males than females
of this age group. In general, death was not
caused by the influenza virus itself, but by the
body’s immunological reaction to the virus.
Individuals with the strongest immune systems were more likely to die than individuals
with weaker immune systems. One source
reports that out of 272,500 male influenza
deaths in 1918, nearly 49 percent were aged
20 to 39, whereas only 18 percent were under
age 5 and 13 percent were over age 50. The
fact that males aged 18 to 40 were the hardest hit by the influenza had serious economic
consequences for the families that had lost
their primary breadwinner.

---

I will attempt to post a link to the source below. It's an interesting read.

https://www.stlouisfed.org/~/media/files/pdfs/community-development...report.pdf

Jeff said

The existence of outlier "experts" does not negate the consensus of economists and epidemiologists.

There is a HUGE, enormous difference between “consensus” and “fact”, two words you continue to conflate. You are not alone in doing so.

Let’s take a moment to pause and consider the fact (oh there’s that word again), that the expert consensus was that it was detrimental to containing the spread that people wear masks. And the consensus was, for a long time among experts, that the risk to the American population of an outbreak was “very low”. The expert consensus was even at one time telling us that person to person transmission was not evident.

Bottom line: many people have been wrong about many things as this has unfolded Me. You. Trump. Fauci. And most certainly the WHO. It’s a long list and we are all on it. So forgive me if I am a skeptical when I see these new “reports” from “experts”. The one thing I do know for absolute sure is I’m not taking any covid advice from some amped up roller coaster enthusiasts who think they are smarter than the people who do this for a living. Nor would I expect anyone to change the way they deal with their family’s health because MaverickLaunch said so. But then, I really try to refrain from the pastime so prevalent here as painting my opinions as fact. That’s just not helpful.

^Then why do you keep engaging? For not caring about enthusiasts points of view, you sure seem to care a lot. It's actually embarrassing. I feel bad for you...trying over and over again to prove your points and failing. All the while, "not caring".

Who says I’m failing? You? I don’t think you get to decide. I don’t think anyone does for that matter. You can have an opinion of whether I’m failing, but I couldn’t care less. I feel successful and my family feels that I’m successful.. not much else matters to me.

Don’t feel embarrassed for me. That’s a rude and condescending thing to say to someone. Such is the coaster enthusiast community, you think I’d be used to it by now. I still have this flawed belief that humans are good at heart, but then people like you set me straight. Thanks for that reality check.

You’re right about one thing. I don’t care what you think. I’ll listen to it, process it, and either agree or disagree... just like I do with DJ and Jeff and plenty of other people I routinely disagree with. I’m open to the idea I’m wrong sometimes and have even admitted the same. Today even, scroll up. Wish everyone else had a similar maturity level, but that’s wishful thinking.

I don't feel embarrassed for you. I didn't say that at all. I said I feel bad for you. Empathetic. And I used to think there was good in people but people like you set me straight. I guess we all have our own ideas of good.

But you did say it’s embarrassing, in reference to my comments.

There is a LOT of good in the world, I’ve lived that this week. I see it everywhere. I will not take the time to explain how my family has acted that out because we do not do things for the recognition it brings. We do things because we have compassion for our fellow man. It is the right thing to do.

I’m not sure how you’ve drawn the conclusion that I’m not a good person and frankly, don’t care. I have much bigger problems in my life than worrying about what people think, especially people I don’t even know.

Inject disinfectant?