SuperSpreader Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 5 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: Orange County being Orange County, has stores opening back up against state orders. Apparently another restaurant owned in OC was interviewed and said the virus can't spread in the sun, and all his staff are young so they won't be hurt if they catch it. Can't wait for the OC hotspot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaku3 Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 1 minute ago, SlipperySlope said: Can't wait for the OC hotspot Is it gonna be on the CW? Also forgot to post this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 Hey remember how Trump supporters were pushing hydroxychloroquine as a potential saviour, and said the media was trying to knock it down to hurt Trump? Well, now that another drug (remdesivir) actually shows real promise...they are saying it's a fake. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/02/donald-trump-coronavirus-remdesivir-229765 Quote Over three weeks ago, hydroxychloroquine was all the rage in MAGA world, despite flawed and scattered evidence about whether the drug could help cure coronavirus. Now there is another drug, remdesivir, with positive early scientific data. Much of MAGA world wants little to do with it. At first, it may seem like a head-scratching response. President Donald Trump’s base has been quick to trumpet any potential solutions to the coronavirus pandemic — especially those Trump himself promotes — regardless of the red flags from medical experts. And here is why: Quote The unexpected reaction appears to stem from the differences in how the two drugs came into the public spotlight. Hydroxychloroquine bubbled up through the MAGA grassroots — little-known investors promoted it online, got on Fox News and suddenly the president was talking about it from the White House. Remdesivir’s progress came through a government-funded trial that had the blessing of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the bête noire of Trump hardliners who blame the government’s top infectious disease expert for undermining the president and causing unnecessary economic damage with his social-distancing guidelines. Experts say the new one might work, and Trump isn't the one who championed it, therefore it is wrong. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marioandsonic Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: Hey remember how Trump supporters were pushing hydroxychloroquine as a potential saviour, and said the media was trying to knock it down to hurt Trump? Well, now that another drug (remdesivir) actually shows real promise...they are saying it's a fake. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/02/donald-trump-coronavirus-remdesivir-229765 And here is why: Experts say the new one might work, and Trump isn't the one who championed it, therefore it is wrong. What have they got to lose? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spawn_of_Apathy Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, Zaku3 said: Also forgot to post this. Already watched it at lunch, but thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 Dumb HBO and banning Canada from their youtube videos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 5 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: Hey remember how Trump supporters were pushing hydroxychloroquine as a potential saviour, and said the media was trying to knock it down to hurt Trump? Well, now that another drug (remdesivir) actually shows real promise...they are saying it's a fake. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/02/donald-trump-coronavirus-remdesivir-229765 And here is why: Experts say the new one might work, and Trump isn't the one who championed it, therefore it is wrong. Gilead donated their entire supply for emergency use, which is great news. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 Good news, the Republican Senate in Michigan has figured out a legal way to bypass the Democratic governor altogether and stop the emergency powers and restrictions!! https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/04/shirkey-petition-drive-limit-michigan-governor-emergency-powers-no-1-priority/3077087001/ Quote Lansing — Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey backed the idea of a petition drive to limit Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's emergency powers during a radio interview Monday morning. "I think it’s probably the No. 1 priority right now," Shirkey said in response to a question during an appearance on the "Your Defending Fathers" show. "That allows true representative government ... to take over." Quote Shirkey, R-Clarklake, was asked about the possibility of a citizen-led petition to change the 1945 law that allows the governor to use emergency powers without the approval of the Legislature and decide when the emergency ends without legislative approval. Whitmer has used the 1945 law to fight the novel coronavirus and has cited in arguing that she doesn't and shouldn't have to negotiate an end to a public health crisis. Such a petition drive would require more than 340,000 signatures but could allow for a policy change to be enacted through the Legislature without the governor's support. “I would look forward to starting that process, which I hope we do within the next couple weeks," Shirkey said. Monday. Think they can find 340,000 suburban hog people to sign the petition? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 6 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: Good news, the Republican Senate in Michigan has figured out a legal way to bypass the Democratic governor altogether and stop the emergency powers and restrictions!! https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/04/shirkey-petition-drive-limit-michigan-governor-emergency-powers-no-1-priority/3077087001/ Think they can find 340,000 suburban hog people to sign the petition? Yes. They can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 25 minutes ago, Jose said: False. Proximate crowding isn't density. 22 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: I was referring more to how many people are crammed into public transit compared to many US cities. You're right that density (in terms of where you sleep) doesn't matter at all compared to how often you are physically close to people (which obviously can be affected by density, however, indirectly, as it relates to packed public areas). 18 minutes ago, mclumber1 said: A lone carrier is going to spread the virus to more people in a crowded stadium compared to a park. Stadiums and parks and the like is proximate crowding. This stuff can happen literally anywhere, like in line at a rural grocery store or suburban mall. It's also not density as we know and define it. Italy has many multiples of our density and is doing far better than the US in it's response Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrbiggsly Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 7 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: Good news, the Republican Senate in Michigan has figured out a legal way to bypass the Democratic governor altogether and stop the emergency powers and restrictions!! https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/04/shirkey-petition-drive-limit-michigan-governor-emergency-powers-no-1-priority/3077087001/ Think they can find 340,000 suburban hog people to sign the petition? If my facebook feed is any indication, yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 On-point messaging: Reopening the Economy Would Add 233,000 Deaths by July but Save Millions of Jobs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairslinger Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 19 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: Good news, the Republican Senate in Michigan has figured out a legal way to bypass the Democratic governor altogether and stop the emergency powers and restrictions!! https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/04/shirkey-petition-drive-limit-michigan-governor-emergency-powers-no-1-priority/3077087001/ Think they can find 340,000 suburban hog people to sign the petition? Mr. and Mrs. Bananas, Humphrey Boa-gart, and Snowball I all think the stay at home orders are tyranny, so they got a good shot. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 14 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Proximate crowding isn't density. Stadiums and parks and the like is proximate crowding. This stuff can happen literally anywhere, like in line at a rural grocery store or suburban mall. It's also not density as we know and define it. Italy has many multiples of our density and is doing far better than the US in it's response Proximate crowding isn't going to happen more often in a dense city? C'mon dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 Just now, Jose said: Proximate crowding isn't going to happen more often in a dense city? C'mon dude. I get what he is trying to say - proximity crowding isn't solely dependent on population density, and that is true. It is, however, more common in dense areas compared to sparse areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 1 minute ago, CitizenVectron said: I get what he is trying to say - proximity crowding isn't solely dependent on population density, and that is true. It is, however, more common in dense areas compared to sparse areas. That's not what he said though. He said population density is irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 52 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said: I get what he is trying to say - proximity crowding isn't solely dependent on population density, and that is true. It is, however, more common in dense areas compared to sparse areas. If there's one grocery store per ten thousand people, it doesn't matter if it is in rural Idaho or NYC. It's still one per ten thousand. Some of the worst per capita outbreaks are in places with a lot of proximate crowding--meat packing facilities, nursing homes, prisons--that are often in communities that are not dense. This is why when a state goes into lockdown, the rules are consistent throughout the very diverse state, and not one set of rules for cities and another for rural areas. No large gatherings, social distancing, stay at home, etc. In NYC, if we ran many more buses and trains than we normally do (so we wouldn't have to crowd) and enforced social distancing and masks, we could still have a somewhat safe and functional transit sustem that reduces the chance of transmission! And if actual density mattered, density as in persons per square mile, the US would be doing fantastic while Western Europe and South Korea would be completely overrun. This simply isn't the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 1 hour ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Proximate crowding isn't density. Stadiums and parks and the like is proximate crowding. This stuff can happen literally anywhere, like in line at a rural grocery store or suburban mall. It's also not density as we know and define it. Italy has many multiples of our density and is doing far better than the US in it's response Frequency of crowding events matters, man. I know you love cities with all your heart but densely populated areas give way more opportunities to be in close proximity to an infected person. It’s unquestionably more difficult to ease the spread in such environments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 1 minute ago, sblfilms said: Frequency of crowding events matters, man. I know you love cities with all your heart but densely populated areas give way more opportunities to be in close proximity to an infected person. It’s unquestionably more difficult to ease the spread in such environments. If this was about population density than Staten Island wouldn't be one of the hardest-hit areas in NYC. Likewise, Long Island, that suburban Hasidic community in NY, and New Jersey would not be hotspots if this was just about density. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 1 minute ago, Jason said: If this was about population density than Staten Island wouldn't be one of the hardest-hit areas in NYC. Likewise, Long Island, that suburban Hasidic community in NY, and New Jersey would not be hotspots if this was just about density. Good thing nobody said it’s just about density. Density provides a more complicated set of problems. This is not even up for debate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaladinSolo Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 Density matters for raw numbers, but when you adjust for population the rates of infection are just as high or higher in a lot of rural areas, some because of prisons, some because of plants, some because of outbreaks from a single event like a funeral in Albany GA. Only 2 NY counties are in the 10 highest rates of infection. Basically people congregate everywhere into large gatherings regardless of density, they just travel further to do it. Look at the Nordic countries, Denmark's density is almost 10 times higher than Finland, and Norway, while 5 times Sweden's but its only twice the rate of death of Finland and Norway, while its 1/3 of Sweden's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 Discussions here always end up on the extremes and it can be very frustrating. Just because population density isn't irrelevant does not necessarily mean it is the number one factor. I really have to say this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, PaladinSolo said: Density matters for raw numbers, but when you adjust for population the rates of infection are just as high or higher in a lot of rural areas, some because of prisons, some because of outbreaks from a single event like a funeral in Albany GA. That's all true. But what is also generally true is that in densely populated areas, you'll tend to have events or periods where you'll pack more people into a small area, much more often. A person who attends a church once per week probably has a lower chance of being infected than a person who rides the subway twice a day Monday through Friday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iculus Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 On 5/1/2020 at 1:06 PM, Jason said: She's cooler than he is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 Musk was (potentially!) not lying when he said he is selling most physical possessions! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal-El814 Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 1 hour ago, Jason said: If this was about population density than Staten Island wouldn't be one of the hardest-hit areas in NYC. Likewise, Long Island, that suburban Hasidic community in NY, and New Jersey would not be hotspots if this was just about density. Are people really getting in there and testing the Hasidic community? I honestly don't know, my main experience with them was being completely ignored walking through town except on whatever days they would come up to me, cigarettes in hand, and "ask" me to light them without actually saying anything to me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 1 hour ago, sblfilms said: Good thing nobody said it’s just about density. Density provides a more complicated set of problems. This is not even up for debate Agreed on all points. I was especially perplexed when he said if this was just about density, NJ would not have such high numbers. NJ literally has the highest population density in the country! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osxmatt Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 IMHE model was just updated, and it exploded. It's now projecting 134,000 deaths by August 4th. https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 14 minutes ago, osxmatt said: IMHE model was just updated, and it exploded. It's now projecting 134,000 deaths by August 4th. https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america This is the model that had the lower bound of 66K mortalities at the beginning of April, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osxmatt Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 1 minute ago, Emperor Diocletian II said: This is the model that had the lower bound of 66K mortalities at the beginning of April, correct? Correct. It's a garbage model, but frequently cited by Trump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marioandsonic Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 What's a better model to use? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 White House ignoring John Hopkins model (which predicts 200,000 deaths by June 1) in favour of one predicting deaths basically stop on May 15: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osxmatt Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 13 minutes ago, marioandsonic said: What's a better model to use? I don't know that I've seen one which has been accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 11 minutes ago, osxmatt said: I don't know that I've seen one which has been accurate. My view of evaluating the applicability of all data models -- including those that I have developed! -- is not so much how "accurate" they are, but rather how "less inaccurate" they are! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commissar SFLUFAN Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 5 minutes ago, Emperor Diocletian II said: My view of evaluating the applicability of all data models -- including those that I have developed! -- is not so much how "accurate" they are, but rather how "less inaccurate" they are! God, that's a great quote - I really outdid myself with that one! 2 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.