The numbers, just look at the numbers. It really is that simple.

The link I posted earlier has some excellent insights that go counter to Flu Armageddon. You have to look.

I do the mask because I have to, I do the wipes and other stuff because it makes my friend feel better (he spritzes going in and coming out of his doctors appointments, hand sani and then he wipes the dash) and because, this is important: The data sucks and the "experts" have flip flopped like a fish on a dock.

All the smart folks: Not transmittable person to person, don't wear a mask, lives for hours on flat surfaces and can leap small buildings in a single bound...that and the absolute most repellent use of models I have ever seen in my life, and I was good at them.

So. In two weeks the next smart science will say that CV-19 is only defeated by the methods adopted by me to help my buddy feel better as he manages the pain leading to his demise.

Science isn't doing well as the experts try and figure out the politics of CV.

And it lives on hard surfaces. And can be transferred by touch. And can be transferred by breathing. And I’m sure some other ways as well.

Tearing down the country because there’s around a 0.3% chance that the above will happen if you contract it? That’s fact based common sense? As Paul said, look at the DATA. Also shut off the news.

where is the "0.3%" coming from?

post the model so seahawk can evaluate it...

One definitely would not want to take civil discourse cues from our country's leadership; both sides of the cesspool behave like babies 100% of the time - it's both shameful and embarrassing.

The community based sampling exercises I have seen that took a statistically significant random sample of a local community and then extrapolated the data to the entire population have all suggested a fatality rate of under 0.5%, at least those that I’ve read from reputable sources (mostly university researchers). The challenge here is that we have all of the numerator data but not the denominator data, and there’s no way to practically know how many people have already had it because the vast majority are asymptomatic.

CDC in early June: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/05/fact-check-cdc-estimates-covid-19-death-rate-0-26/5269331002/

Numbers matter...they of course walked it back when it became political.

Do me a favor, go be wrong about hunting Crows. You are out of your depth where models are concerned.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1101932/coronavirus-covid19-cases-and-deaths-number-us-americans/

And we know the deaths attributed to CV-19 are inflated.

Numbers.

Took two minutes: They used "models" to build their "model" for their "estimates".

Jesus.

There is actual data on who gets it, who shows symptoms, who does not, morbidity rates, increase in testing and the assumed hidden infection rate before the increase in testing, etc. And trust me, the death rate from CV-19 is exaggerated.

Sorry.

You are not really good at this, are you?

I was about to post that it looked like an abundance of assumptions were used, and little hard data. Paul presented my argument in a much more educated manner.

Personally I prefer the simplicity of the community based random sampling model. That way you know the numerator (deaths), admittedly inflated by the reporting of ALL Covid positive deaths vs deaths where Covid was the actual cause of death. And you have a reasonable approximation of the denominator, assuming that a statistically significant percentage of the population was sampled and without bias. After that point it’s math that my 10 year old could comprehend. KISS.

The County where I live in Maryland: Population 120,000. Deaths from CV-19: 48.

I won't include actual positive cases because that number is not known...and that goes for the entire world. Predictions based on faulty models isn't my thing.

Just heard back from my friend who is still recovering, she was in very good health , non smoker, around 50 YO.

This is what she went through

I had it pretty bad, surgery in the bottom half if my lungs that are still pretty damaged from it. I went from covid to pneumonia to bronchitis to sinus infection in the four weeks following my fever break.

My daughter boyfriend and his roommate tested positive, so did my nephew. Headaches, mostly for them.

All in their late 20's early 30's.

We'll see.

The models have been based upon GIGO since day one imo. Models, computer simulations, etc. are only as good as the input data and the variables built into them.... and it was scarce, inadequate, and simply incorrect. Folks attempting to interpret them and expecting accurate predictions from them.... are not like me.

The actual deaths from the virus are real however. NYC was real also...

Lack of accurate tests .... then & now, doesn't help.

"They've" been winging it from the git-go imo. The Fed, states, and the medical communities.... all of them imo.

It's not even close to over either.... be well, and use common sense.

Runnie for King - 2020 :)

My county is 25 deaths with a total population of 516k, and I believe 19 are tied to three nursing homes. The community sampling approach can be skewed by localized numbers that may not be representative of the entire population. Where I find it interesting is approximating the number of total infected including those that are asymptomatic.

You cannot fathom that depth.

I've done modelling - real models - for decades, and published the results in peer-reviewed journals.

You should stop muddling.

Now, go ahead and hawk something else up.

My nephew graduated a year early and is enrolled in college for the fall. A ‘social distancing bonfire’ is planned. Chief Sandwicher says if I go I’m in quarantine for 14 days. This sucks, ironically.

For the record, I’m against the virus.

Tell me more about your "torn down country"? The numbers are as good as they are only because of the measures taken to this point. Now, we're about to see what they can be in the states whose leaders are willing to let it rip. Also, I don't have the means to be able to watch the news.

Sure.

Reviewed by your peers in a no kidding Journal? Of what: Crows and the Law: Modelling Crow Compliance in an Uncertain World?

Goodness that must have been a goat rope.

Shoot me a link. I live to be impressed.

Really? Prove it. Scientific evidence that 6 ft has been demonstrated to reduce the spread. That wholesale lockdowns reduce the spread. Data that complies with scientific method, not theory. Because we’ve had more wrong theories than right thus far in this entire goat rope.