Coronavirus (No politics)

#2,326
#2,326
xavierbballfan said:
If by feels you mean actual data, then sure.

The interventions should be based on that and not some talking points about a false choice between the economy and medicine. I find it hard to believe that the economy would be thriving if the models (based on data rather than emotion) are correct and we had millions of people infected over the next three months, hospitals overwhelmed.
Click to expand...
You find it hard to believe. That's feelings. Quit being foolish.

Across the multiple businesses I know here, sales are down an average of 90%. That was reflected, too, in news stories run locally. If you think sales would still be down 90% without these "interventions", you're a total lost cause.

Give up the fear. This is proving to be nothing and every single estimate you've made in the earlier parts of this thread have whiffed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BennesseeVols, JacketVol and allvol123
#2,327
#2,327
This entire panic is driven by passive economic participants wanting everything for everyone to shut down because they or someone they know is high risk.

That's not your call alone. That is selfish fear. And you're killing your own communities out of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BennesseeVols and Pepe_Silvia
#2,328
#2,328
At least one of my relatives is going to come out of this well. My 19 y.o. nephew is headed to UTC in the Fall after taking a gap year following H.S. He's been working a couple of part-time jobs at entertainment/physical fitness establishments the past year, both of which are now closed but he would've had to quit in August anyway to go to school. He lives at home with his parents and has zero overhead. I don't know exactly what he was making at work but the government is now going to give him $875 a week to sit on his ass and play X-box until he leaves for college. Assuming he files his own taxes this year, he'll get to request the $1,200 stimulus as a refund payment in January '21.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol and VolnJC
#2,329
#2,329
ButchPlz said:
My friend, the average profit margin across all industries across all sizes of business is right at 6%, not 10%. Grocery stores, as an example, make around 1%. WalMart hovers around 3%. A 3% margin is absolutely not bad.

I'm not trying to make insurance companies out to be boogeymen. I'm saying they have done what they can to make the market locked down via laws. That's absolutely true- you and I couldn't start an insurance firm not because of the financial exposure, but because the immense cost we would have to assume to deal with the legal crap that has been created. If it was purely financial exposure you'd still have people getting into the market, or being creative with strategies to get around it. Instead, our laws (*cough*obamacare*cough*), many written by insurance companies themselves, have gutted most of the opportunity for creativity and innovation in getting people covered financially purely by making certain innovations legally non-viable.

Healthcare in this country is a mess from many, many sides. Insurance companies are a big part of it.
Click to expand...
I never said the average profit is currently 10%. I said the averaged desired profit is 10%. Just like you, i can name companies too. Home depot is 10%, Darden restaurants is 10%, DR Horton 11%, Publix is about 7%. Proctor and Gamble ... 20%. Want to include insurance? Auto finally got out of the negative combined ratio for the first time in 12 years.

You and I will have a tough time entering health insurance because the exposure COSTS are too high. Small health insurance company has one client with cancer or a series of major surgery and the losses are significant. Because of this, you would be required to have capital available to cover it. 15k of premium doesnt cover near 1 million of healthcare cost to that one patient. So I'll disagree with you that financial exposure isnt the reason.

We can argue all day and I wont comment any further on it to spare this threads subject so I will agree to disagree with you on some of your points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#2,331
#2,331
They removed our county from the list of cases. Not sure wht, they just posted a short article saying we had been removed.
 
#2,332
#2,332
Alabama is now officially closed to everything but essential businesses...
Alabama coronavirus update
641 active cases =0.01% of population
3 deaths from 644 total cases = 0.4% death rate
12% positive test rate (probably lower some private labs only report positive tests)
Overwhelming majority near Birmingham 177 cases Mobile County 23 Baldwin County 5
 
#2,335
#2,335
xavierbballfan said:
If by feels you mean actual data, then sure.

The interventions should be based on that and not some talking points about a false choice between the economy and medicine. I find it hard to believe that the economy would be thriving if the models (based on data rather than emotion) are correct and we had millions of people infected over the next three months, hospitals overwhelmed.
Click to expand...

Still forgetting that Fergerson said initial model was still WRONG due to knowledge now that more people already had it from before than what it was based on. Pause was right thing. Let that finish then decide how much longer it should be. Even he said that was deaths thru the end of the year.
 
#2,336
#2,336
allvol123 said:
It is, for so many reasons. CDC is currently reporting 0.1% for those aged 20-44 infected..0.5% for 45-64.

Numbers infected are under reported.
Click to expand...

So double the total cases and you get 2.3%. I'm not sure where you are basing your numbers off of, but we are talking about doubling the total cases in the world and no more deaths, and its still 2.3%.
 
#2,337
#2,337
VolnJC said:
Alabama is now officially closed to everything but essential businesses...
Alabama coronavirus update
641 active cases =0.01% of population
3 deaths from 644 total cases = 0.4% death rate
12% positive test rate (probably lower some private labs only report positive tests)
Overwhelming majority near Birmingham 177 cases Mobile County 23 Baldwin County 5
Click to expand...

Thanks for actual data
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC
#2,338
#2,338
g8terh8ter_eric said:
So double the total cases and you get 2.3%. I'm not sure where you are basing your numbers off of, but we are talking about doubling the total cases in the world and no more deaths, and its still 2.3%.
Click to expand...

Coronavirus deaths and severe cases by age: What we know - Vox


As mentioned above, the CDC covers one huge 20-44 age range in its report, but here’s what we know about that group: 14.3 percent hospitalized, 2 percent in the ICU, and 0.1 percent fatality rate.
Click to expand...
 
#2,339
#2,339
ButchPlz said:
Well, and besides that, we've not even seen this huge breakout of wide scale healthcare rationing. Some? Sure. But this healthcare collapse that's been predicted isn't happening.
Click to expand...

We aren’t there yet and hopefully won’t be. I was trying to do some math on that last week. We have 3x more ICU beds per captia than Italy so we are going to see pinches later than they did at the same number of cases per capita than they did. I think I came up with something like end of next week or the following week. But I also admitted at the time that comparisons to Italy wasn’t the right way to think about this. The only way to see it coming is good modeling with accurate case counts, severity ratios, hospitalization and ICU capacity, modeled for each outbreak pocket in the US.
 
#2,340
#2,340
#2,341
#2,341
g8terh8ter_eric said:
The mortality rate is based on who gets it, and who lives and dies from the virus. Even if the number recovered skyrockets, you aren't going to see this thing under a 2% mortality rate. We aren't talking about total population, just those who have lived or died from the virus itself.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know this. It is unlikely it will be above 1.
 
#2,342
#2,342
g8terh8ter_eric said:
The mortality rate is based on who gets it, and who lives and dies from the virus. Even if the number recovered skyrockets, you aren't going to see this thing under a 2% mortality rate. We aren't talking about total population, just those who have lived or died from the virus itself.
Click to expand...
Worldwide probably not..in the US it's 1.6%
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol
#2,343
#2,343
g8terh8ter_eric said:
The mortality rate is based on who gets it, and who lives and dies from the virus. Even if the number recovered skyrockets, you aren't going to see this thing under a 2% mortality rate. We aren't talking about total population, just those who have lived or died from the virus itself.
Click to expand...

I think when all data is in and total cases modeled it could be between 0.5% and 1% for the general population as long as good medical care is provided. I could see initial estimates of 2-3% being too high.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JacketVol and xavierbballfan
#2,344
#2,344
Anybody else curious about any new lingering residual health issues for those recovered from this virus? Those perfectly healthy prior to getting it may not be perfectly health coming out the other side.

I hope our military studies this as they have a built in control group with access to complete prior medical records for tracking comparisons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WallyBalls and AM64
#2,345
#2,345
TennTradition said:
We aren’t there yet and hopefully won’t be. I was trying to do some math on that last week. We have 3x more ICU beds per captia than Italy so we are going to see pinches later than they did at the same number of cases per capita than they did. I think I came up with something like end of next week or the following week. But I also admitted at the time that comparisons to Italy wasn’t the right way to think about this. The only way to see it coming is good modeling with accurate case counts, severity ratios, hospitalization and ICU capacity, modeled for each outbreak pocket in the US.
Click to expand...

Ive read Italy has more ICU beds than the US per capita. Or maybe its just beds in general.
 
#2,347
#2,347
#2,348
#2,348
SIAP

How to handle groceries (I think this also applies to shipments coming to your house). He made a mistake on the video about virus on cardboard: it is 24 hours, not one hour.

 
Last edited:
#2,349
#2,349
JacketVol said:
Thanks for actual data
Click to expand...
DynaLo said:
Anybody else curious about any new lingering residual health issues for those recovered from this virus? Those perfectly healthy prior to getting it may not be perfectly health coming out the other side.

I hope our military studies this as they have a built in control group with access to complete prior medical records for tracking comparisons.
Click to expand...
We don’t know enough about that right now and that concerns me. Can you get reinfected again? and what it does to your lungs and immune system this would relate to the serious cases of patients.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, DynaLo and xavierbballfan
#2,350
#2,350
ButchPlz said:
You find it hard to believe. That's feelings. Quit being foolish.

Across the multiple businesses I know here, sales are down an average of 90%. That was reflected, too, in news stories run locally. If you think sales would still be down 90% without these "interventions", you're a total lost cause.

Give up the fear. This is proving to be nothing and every single estimate you've made in the earlier parts of this thread have whiffed.
Click to expand...


I have quoted models and not made any predictions myself as I am not an epidemiologist so please do not state that I have "whiffed" on predictions that I have not made. Being aggressive doesn't make you right.

I have argued about whether the Imperial college of London model is incorrect and that it has been changed and defended the position that I have not seen the base model change. I have asked multiple times for a reference that this has been changed and am still waiting for any information that indicates this. I will always change my opinions based on higher quality information.

I also did not say that the interventions do not have an economic impact.

You can try to belittle things that do not align with what you want to be true but that will not make it a reality.

The interventions are clearly having an impact on the economy which is something that is concerning to real people in a real way, not something to be diminished. I just want a more constructive discussion where those who oppose the interventions cite economic data for how much intervention they think would be necessary and why they think that justifies the impact that it is projected to have on our society from a medical standpoint (hospitalization, morbidity, mortality). There is no reality where we ignored the virus, changed nothing, and the economy continued to hum along at its previous pace. If you want to make an economic argument I would be interested to hear it as long as it is based on data rather than anecdotes and insults.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BenGrimm and JCHateSteve
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top