Covid-19

[ThunderHorse]

Incidentally, has anyone else come across information saying that Chinese cellphone users dropped by 21 million on last years figures?

I saw it via a few sources.

IRT AUS, I spent a week in Perth and it was amazing.

 

[R.Caerbannog]

Epoch Times did a pretty good job presenting this in a digestible manner.

 

[Brill]

Incidentally, has anyone else come across information saying that Chinese cellphone users dropped by 21 million on last years figures?

You know some of us ”heard” that.

(SIGINT humour)

 

[GOTWA]

(SIGINT humour)

Such an odd breed...

 

[Brill]

Even the CDC estimates over 70k deaths before we’re done with this thing at the low end.

An unbelievable number to be sure but how many have recovered? Unemployment is 2-3% (think estimated 20 million out of work) and may go up to 30%...all that damage for estimated 70k dead?

Why can’t low risk folks and those that have recovered got back to “normal”?

 

[R.Caerbannog]

Incidentally, has anyone else come across information saying that Chinese cellphone users dropped by 21 million on last years figures?

Last I saw it was at around 1-2 million but that was weeks ago, I think. 21 million is mindblowing, especially considering how social credit scores are directly tied to cell phone numbers.

An unbelievable number to be sure but how many have recovered? Unemployment is 2-3% (think estimated 20 million out of work) and may go up to 30%...all that damage for estimated 70k dead?

Why can’t low risk folks and those that have recovered got back to “normal”?

View attachment 33223

It beats the initial estimate of 2 million plus dead. Which roughly would've amounted to 1 in 165 Americans succumbing to the disease, never mind the secondary and tertiary deaths that would have been attributed to supply, medical, and utility chains breaking down.

Honestly, I think countries everywhere were trying to buy time to beef up logistical systems and test therapeutics. Cause China's virus is going to rip through the global population regardless. Hopefully this lockdown bought us enough time to get resources ready for the second wave.

Containment was never really an option as people are selfish, idiotic, and blind. We're not outta the woods yet.

 

[R.Caerbannog]

Scrubbed research article
https://img-prod.tgcom24.mediaset.i...0192-5eb8307f-017c-4075-a697-348628da0204.pdf

 

[Board and Seize]

This YouTube channel is a guy who lived in China for a decade or so and went fairly native. He's back in the states now and has been reporting on the virus. He's also got a video on the 21MM lost subscribers.

Good stuff.

 

[GOTWA]

An unbelievable number to be sure but how many have recovered? Unemployment is 2-3% (think estimated 20 million out of work) and may go up to 30%...all that damage for estimated 70k dead?

Why can’t low risk folks and those that have recovered got back to “normal”?

View attachment 33223

I too have wondered where the line is between balancing lives against livelihoods. It's great when you take extreme measures to protect as many as possible, but if you go all Soviet Union at the same time, what's the point? I'm not a decision maker, and I'm glad I'm not in the position to have to decide, but being a leader requires you to make hard choices. What that hard choice is...I dunno.

 

[Dvr55119]

An unbelievable number to be sure but how many have recovered? Unemployment is 2-3% (think estimated 20 million out of work) and may go up to 30%...all that damage for estimated 70k dead?

Why can’t low risk folks and those that have recovered got back to “normal”?

View attachment 33223

Well there are also those cases where People are out running marathons a couple months ago and are now on life support.

70k deaths is what we are going to have with social distancing. We go to hundreds of thousands without it.

 

[Brill]

I too have wondered where the line is between balancing lives against livelihoods. It's great when you take extreme measures to protect as many as possible, but if you go all Soviet Union at the same time, what's the point? I'm not a decision maker, and I'm glad I'm not in the position to have to decide, but being a leader requires you to make hard choices. What that hard choice is...I dunno.

I think the “wartime footing” was valid as @R.Caerbannog notedwhen models forecast 2mil dead but those SAME once incorrect models are now right at 70k deaths?

I‘m going to say no.

The reality is our decision makers will be butchered by the media if they open the states and US tomorrow or in the Fall so there isn’t any downside.

 

[Brill]

70k deaths is what we are going to have with social distancing. We go to hundreds of thousands without it.

The UW model has ALWAYS included full social distancing as well as self isolation.

edit: the model has lowered it to just over 61k.

IHME | COVID-19 Projections

 

[Cookie_]

I think the “wartime footing” was valid as @R.Caerbannog notedwhen models forecast 2mil dead but those SAME once incorrect models are now right at 70k deaths?

I‘m going to say no.

The reality is our decision makers will be butchered by the media if they open the states and US tomorrow or in the Fall so there isn’t any downside.

A point on the modeling; it isn't that the models projecting 2 million were wrong, just older.

These models are getting new data amd figures pumped into them on a daily basis.
The 70K projection is just using (when it was created) the newest information.

 

[Dame]

Incidentally, has anyone else come across information saying that Chinese cellphone users dropped by 21 million on last years figures?

 

[Florida173]

A point on the modeling; it isn't that the models projecting 2 million were wrong, just older.

These models are getting new data amd figures pumped into them on a daily basis.
The 70K projection is just using (when it was created) the newest information.

The IHME has always been a fantasy. Johns Hopkins is saying the case fatality ratio is around 6%. The peer-reviewed published Lancet article puts Ohio at 4%. They are using the algorithm > Number recorded deaths / Number confirmed cases. Depending on location and using that same model establishes a case-fatality rate is likely somewhere between 1.38% and 6%.

A German study just estimated as low as .37%, Diamond Princess Cruise was .66%. The German study can be criticized for sure as it's a small population in Gangelt, but the answer is likely still on the lower end. The 6% from Johns Hopkins is incredibly misleading and has had 90,000 US cases go 'missing' 3 days ago, but they are working to get them back USA cases decreased by ~90,000? #2093.

Unfortunately a lot of media outlets and leaders are using Johns Hopkins peer reviewed Lancet published work with big scary numbers to instill fear.

 

[Grunt]

Well, I have reached the saturation point of fear mongering and no longer believe any of the numbers provided....

 

[Brill]

A point on the modeling; it isn't that the models projecting 2 million were wrong, just older.

These models are getting new data amd figures pumped into them on a daily basis.
The 70K projection is just using (when it was created) the newest information.

Upon revelation of new data, I now project the Chiefs to win Super Bowl LIV by 11 points.

 

[Intel Nerd]

The IHME has always been a fantasy. Johns Hopkins is saying the case fatality ratio is around 6%. The peer-reviewed published Lancet article puts Ohio at 4%. They are using the algorithm > Number recorded deaths / Number confirmed cases. Depending on location and using that same model establishes a case-fatality rate is likely somewhere between 1.38% and 6%.

A German study just estimated as low as .37%, Diamond Princess Cruise was .66%. The German study can be criticized for sure as it's a small population in Gangelt, but the answer is likely still on the lower end. The 6% from Johns Hopkins is incredibly misleading and has had 90,000 US cases go 'missing' 3 days ago, but they are working to get them back USA cases decreased by ~90,000? #2093.

Unfortunately a lot of media outlets and leaders are using Johns Hopkins peer reviewed Lancet published work with big scary numbers to instill fear.

On the last point, you hit the nail on the head. We have more to fear from fear of this virus than the actual virus itself. Additionally, the concern I have with the numbers is that it's not based on assessed/projected cases, but only CONFIRMED. So if you aren't high risk or dying of pneumonia many places won't see you and the numbers won't get counted. Here at my base I did a food drop for a friend who was told with high certainty that they had it, but they wouldn't test. Same thing happened to a friends daughter.

Additionally, regardless of cause of death, they're being very liberal with coronavirus death attribution that'll certainly force the numbers higher than they are. It'll be interesting to see the actual numbers in a few years, if we can ever get even semi-reliable estimates on total infection vs death rate instead of just the very limited confirmed case numbers.

 

[Florida173]

I mean... look at this. IHME's model is good as long as 5,000 or 500 people die today. Model successful /sarc

 

[Brill]

From model experts:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1248302159403331586

note: “...our estimates will change, much like weather forecasts adjust.”

Massive Easter storm system threatens 95 million, includes tornadoes and tennis ball-size hail

95 MILLION AMERICANS THREATENED!!!!! SHUT DOWN THE ENTIRE SOUTH!!!!!