themeanmachine
Footballguy
Wouldn't it be the opposite? i would think those who are sick (and symptomatic) would be more likely to be at home resting, not out at the store.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread. Fresh epidemic fears as child pneumonia cases surge in Europe after China outbreak. NOW in USA (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Big League Chew
- Start date
Politician Spock
Footballguy
Harbin China has just been locked down due to COVID-19.
It's a city of 10 million people.
It's a city of 10 million people.
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
Can't go so far as to say he's wrong when his exact words were "IT'S CLOSER to the flu than many thought". When the timeline starts being lengthened (as it's starting to) then this actually does start to mirror the length of the flu season. It's still much more of a problem than the flu due to it's contagiousness but we've known that for quite awhile now. But as more is learned it truly does begin to share more and more with the flu including a narrowing gap between their respective mortality rates.
the moops
Footballguy
People who are sick would be home. People who have recovered would more likely be out
the rover
Footballguy
shader
Footballguy
His exact words were “justaflu bros are gonna end up being right.” When he realized how silly that was, he moved the goalposts.
Yep, very interesting to watch. To me it's fairly certain they are going to have more deaths than similar places that impose strict lockdowns. But the lockdown has A LOT of costs associated with it and it becomes more and more questionable whether it was truly worth it if the difference isn't fairly significant. Trillions of dollars, massive hardships that will contribute to further deaths... all to save a relatively small number of people most of which had fairly limited time left to live. That won't look so great.
And it'll make people less likely to pay attention if a similar situation arises in the future...one that could potentially be even worse.
Last edited by a moderator:
Politician Spock
Footballguy
When the US has 61,000 flu deaths, approximately 1,567 of them would be New York City residents.
COVID-19, after only 6 weeks, with the entire city on lock down, has already killed TEN TIMES AS MANY (15.869) New York City residents.
It's not comparable to the flu. It's not even close to being like the flu.
I think you're misunderstanding my point. The reason for the number of deaths was asymptomatic spread and no vaccine. The flu has a vaccine limiting death totals. The lockdowns were justified. The fatal nature of CV is a lot more comparable to flu than many thought though.
Of course. The point makes no sense. People who are out shopping are also locked down when they are not shopping
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
Tell that to scooter who quoted the below to tell him he's wrong. Thanks for your continued work as an arbiter of what is discussed and how it's discussed here. It's proven to be so helpful.
Statorama
gangster
the moops
Footballguy
Morton Muffley
Footballguy
I don't really know that you can say this for certain. Flu deaths are all estimated. Because almost no one gets "flu" listed as their cause of death on their death certificate, even if it was likely a significant contributing factor. Meanwhile in this situation there's a huge motivation to test people that have died, and then list them as a Covid death, so you can track down everyone they've been in contact with. These death counts are not an apples to apples comparison.
Last edited by a moderator:
the rover
Footballguy
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
And yet the experts, doctors, scientists, and government keep comparing it to the flu. Look we all know and repeatedly keep saying this is worse than the flu. There's nothing factually wrong with saying as more is known, the comparisons between the two keep inching closer. They literally have now been admitted to being mistaken for one another.
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
Excuse me, but he also said "Justaflu bros are gonna end up being right."
Also, we already know that it's not closer to the flu than many thought, because in one month we had more than average yearly number of flu deaths -- and that was WITH social distancing and massive shutdowns.
Average yearly flu deaths with no shutdowns or social distancing: 35K
Last month coronavirus deaths with massive shutdowns and social distancing: 40K
If your goalpost is "Yeah but it's closer to the flu than the 2 million deaths that all those so-called experts were predicting!" then you're being disingenuous.
No, it's estimated flu deaths. Because they don't administer a flu test on everyone that had flu like symptoms and died, and list flu as their cause of death if they test positive.
the rover
Footballguy
Battersbox
Footballguy
What's really strange about this, is it's almost the exact replica of what happened last week. This story was supposedly uploaded to the WHO's website 'in error'. Last week's positive spin from the U of Chicago studies was supposedly leaked by someone to the reported from STAT. In both cases, the company did not release anything. The market reaction to today's news is somewhat surprising however, because it was already known that the Chinese trials had ended early. In fact, that was reported last week alongside the supposed positive data from the U of Chicago study. Doesn't make sense.
Worth mentioning that neither study is official and from the offices of Gilead--they are still scheduled to released some results of their trials next week (they've send end of April for a while). Still, would be nice had the data from China been upbeat, because this drug seemed to be the best thing coming down the pike in terms of treatment.
Morton Muffley
Footballguy
They were indeed, for several reasons IMO:
- many of them are located in Seattle (where this presumably began)
- as knowledge workers they can more easily convert to wfh mode; indeed, I'd suspect many of them already have some wfh time, so ramping up to 100% isn't that difficult
- they employ alot of data scientists, who like those on this board back in February are highly capable of understanding an exponential growth chart; and indeed, I suspect many of them built their own models t share with mgmt
- as with the above, their leaders are predominantly math people who can easily understand what the WHO was saying and what their in-house data scientists were (likely) predicting
"The numbers include not just deaths from COVID-19 but from related causes like the inability to access care in overwhelmed hospitals."
You can't classify all of those as COVID deaths. It's very possible they are lockdown related deaths too. As an example, I don't know a single person that has tested positive for COVID. But I do know someone whose brain surgery was postponed. And that wasn't because the hospitals don't have the capacity to do the surgery...
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
Guess you should've have quoted that comment then instead of the one you chose to. Especially when you quoted something factually correct to tell him he's wrong.
But I guess that's the stage we're drifting back to now that we're again nitpicking and attacking one another instead of posting links and updates. Have at it y'all.
Politician Spock
Footballguy
And part of that is because they've shut off access to medical care for people that need it.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
[scooter]
Footballguy
I replied to his follow-up post because it included the phrase "There have been some bad flu years."
You're gonna nitpick me for not selectively editing his post, then accuse me of nitpicking? That's some stinky chum.
Morton Muffley
Footballguy
Closer? Closer to the flu than what?
Ok, this seems appropriate https://yarn.co/yarn-clip/f9b093c3-1fc0-4ece-9f7c-5907dec11ce8
And fwiw, Fauci said MONTHS ago that he felt the mortality rate was closer to 1% than the case rate calculated 3.4% that some media fear mongers were reporting. But I'll say this again for others, because I've said it to you twice now Mr. A., NO ONE of any import actually thought the real mortality rate was anywhere close to 3.4%. And fwiw, I agree with SO much of what you write, so please don't not take this an an attack - as you IMO wrongly seem to do. It's just clarification on a single point of disagreement.
[scooter]
Footballguy
Technically, you bowed out because you got suspended twice. But, yeah.
Believe it or not, I actually agree with quite a bit of your sentiment. But when you drop into a thread with JUST A FLU BRO!! (without posting any links or updates like Mr. A demands) you should know that you're going to get hammered. Which I think was your goal to begin with.
chet
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Doug B
Footballguy
Yes -- Sanjay Gupta went over this on CNN a few days ago.
That restaurant (in China, forget which city) had a big fan blowing from one side of the dining room to the other. Plus, fomite transmission (which, I know, is out of favor right now) is disregarded -- there was no chance those restaurant patrons spread anything via public touching?
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
No worries, closer to the flu than...
previously thought.
Key word being closer. Certainly not close at all in terms of danger. Again much more contagious. But closer to the flu in terms of mortality rate which like you said some people have been right about for awhile. Others not so much. And now closer in terms of span of time it's been present and spreading.
Yeah, I'd definitely agree it's more dangerous than the flu. Not sure I agree with "not close at all in terms of danger" though. We've been good about remaining isolated, but now I let my kid take a job at a grocery store starting tomorrow for money she doesn't really need because frankly I'm not concerned about it in the slightest.
And even being "more dangerous than the flu" the question remains on whether it was a prudent decision to waste trillion upon trillions of dollars, deny medical care to people that actually need it, and cause massive amounts of hardship in response to it. It needs to be a whole lot more dangerous to justify all of that.
Charlie Harper
Footballguy
CurlyNight
Footballguy
Well, there is black, brown singling out. It's nothing to do with covid and more to do with finding comfort in others like minded. This is CA. The most diverse pop and the most pop is here. On that website has resources of who you can talk to. I'm sure there are lgbtq who prefer to talk to their own. Smart of Newsom not to leave a major group out.
Last edited by a moderator:
otb_lifer
Footballguy
careful now, you know this is gonna get spun to actually mean the opposite, somehow.
- signed,
a guy who has been self isolating since March 11th, and who would not even allow his daughter to say goodbye to her best friend (who was moving to New Hampshire) in person.
i have taken this seriously since jump, plz see beginning of thread.
but we need to start opening our eyes to more than we're allowing ourselves to, in terms of timeline and mortality rates.
JAA
Footballguy
IMO - yes. If we had a large amount of testing, cases could be used as a leading indicator. However, since testing is so small comparatively hospitalizations and deaths being lagging indicators are the best we have.
Mr Anonymous
Footballguy
The danger comes from the contagiousness and how that can lead to the overwhelming of hospitals in a way the flu can't. But that doesn't invalidate your second point at all. The two thoughts combined show why it's necessary to avoid shut downs where hospitals are facing no capacity issues. When contained through common sense measures, blanket state wide shutdowns make no sense. Shut downs should be limited to where outbreaks are and resources then should be directed as needed. And that's precisely what the plan has shifted to going forward. And the goal still remains to avoid outbreaks which is why protective measures should be taken even in places that have never had high numbers.
Politician Spock
Footballguy
Honestly, I can't comprehend the amount of confirmation bias that is required for the mental gymnastics necessary to conclude that NYC is experiencing 4 times as many total deaths because elective medical treatments are not deemed essential.
If this were anywhere near possible of being true, even in the slightest, funeral homes would be screaming to the media about the number of these coming through their doors.
Okay...but my point is that they can't even tell you how many people died of flu in a given year because even in cases where it was a significant contributing factor they weren't likely to list flu as the cause of death on their death certificate. They use some statistical model to estimate all of this. If they tested everyone that died for the flu, and if it came back positive listed their cause of death as the flu, the number of flu deaths could likely be dramatically higher.
JAA
Footballguy
I wasn't attributing the entire gap to that, but reality is that the response to covid itself HAS caused some deaths. So it's not fair to say "all of the 'missing deaths' were because of the virus itself". I'd be surprised if the suicide rate didn't increase dramatically these months.
