I think we probably need to wait another 2 weeks or so before claiming victory. I think the key is to look for increases/decreases in positive test rate. Hell, even a flat positive test rate should be treated as a good thing given that we're relaxing precautions. I've seen headlines saying that Texas has a "spike" but they've also increased testing by a substantial margin.

a facet which is not mentioned in said headlines, i’d wager

Georgia and Florida are stagnating like bosses...
Thanks to all the fake news media for pushing people to take some distance.

Headlines are calling the rise in 1000 confirmed cases a day in Texas proof positive that their reopening is a disaster. Even as their daily death count is dropping, and test rate is going up.

There's no winning. Dems have realized they can use the specter of "public health" to institute martial law. Why would they let go of that power?

So when it's your posts everybody is expected to read your walls of text, but when its any other source of media all the information must be contained in the headline?

Unlike you, I read the articles. But I am curious, if all you read is headlines, why are you actually in this topic? The "headline" is the topic title. You've seen it.

BTW, that was a flame and/or personal attack, and completely off topic. Not reporting you, just making you aware you should probably keep your posts on topic. If you want to send me a PM to air your frustrations at so many words, by my guest.

Back on topic: That wonderful covid relief bill the House dems pushed through with no warning had yet another little gem hidden in it's depths. Sought to end all voter ID laws. Good stuff. No idea what that has to do with covid relief, but that's how much the Dems care about your health. They'll hold it hostage for their political aims, yet again. Forget that those are YOUR tax dollars at work.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on May 18 2020 03:18pm

1.: I am from Germany and have been aware of the Gangelt study for weeks. I am also aware of the intense scrutiny it has drawn. You apparently arent.
2.: If you had read your own source, you would have noticed that the study was conducted in the worst infection cluster in all of Germany. The district where the study was conducted is HIIIGHLY unrepresentative for the country at large. If only 15% of the population have been infected in the worst affected district of Germany, this means that we have essentially gotten nowhere yet in terms of herd immunity. Similar studies from New York confirm this: the dark figure is about 5-10 times higher than the reported numbers, which is lower than some scientists had been hoping for. Most other studies, btw, found the IFR to be slightly higher than the 0.37% from the Gangelt study. Either way, the Gangelt study implies that containment and suppression, rather than mitigation and herd immunity, are the recommended approach.

3.: Since Gangelt and the entire Heinsberg county where it's located are very small-town in nature, with a population density that is neither super low nor super high, the findings about the spread of the virus in this particular place cant be inferred from without further inspection. For example, the spread in New York City can reasonably be expected to follow a much sharper pattern than in small town Gangelt.
4.: Since Gangelt is such a uniquely affected district in Germany and unrepresentative in so many ways, it is not the "most accurate and complete source that exists". It is one (admittedly valuable) piece in the much larger puzzle of understanding this virus.

5.: Nothing in this particular source supports your claim about "97% of coronadeaths coming from co-morbidities" or your outlandish claim that the role co-morbidities play does not vary across age groups.
6.: If you make strong statements like "many studies are coming out globally indicating...", then it is your job to provide sources or reproducible guidelines on where to find those studies rather than a snarky and unspecific "search for medical journals, medical reporting sites".

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on May 18 2020 03:21pm

As Thor has been so kind to inform us, it's neither my job nor a school report (LOL) to post in this forum. I gave you the search terms. You're welcome to search or not at your leisure.

The Gangelt study tells much more than is readily apparent.

1. The majority of the district was at the carnival celebration, where they were exposed en masse.
2. "Only 15%" is a strange way to put it. For 15% of the world to contract Covid19 would indicate over a billion people contracting it globally. And even I've never seen any estimates that high, and I'm on the high side of things. I've never even heard of a coronavirus strain infecting that many people. Given coronaviruses make up 20% of the common colds in existence, there's been plenty of opportunity to experience that. Not everyone catches everything. It just doesn't happen. 15% of an exposed population contracting the virus is pretty huge. Not like the flu of 1918, but that was an epidemic, not a pandemic. This isn't that.
3. They mentioned that cases were evenly spread among all ages, and the test sample showed some 25% asymptomatic. Others reports such as this: https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/01/europe/iceland-testing-coronavirus-intl/index.html indicate as high as 50%. Depending on region, it goes even higher.
4. Comorbidity death rates among the total population range based on the reports from 75-85%. Among the population aged 0-50, the comorbidity death rate is 97-99%. This is for confirmed cases, and the variance is based on locale. Now, you have enough information to find your stats, and oddly, you can calculate the numbers from your favorite aggregate sites and even with their unreliable blanket numbers, it lines up close to perfectly.
5. I never made the claim that comorbidities does not vary between age groups. At least, I don't recall doing so. If I did, that was in error. I've been arguing that those under 50 (or possibly even 60) without comorbidity risk should be able to not only work, but go seek entertainment and socialize as they will, due to the fact that the probability of death or even severe illness is incredibly slim. Those with comorbidity risks under that 50 (or possibly 60) line can choose to self-isolate.

I mean, part of the problem with this entire discussion is that people seem to think that simply informing people they cannot work, they cannot earn a livelihood, they cannot go out, they have to remain in the prison of their home is okay. Life is a risk. Thousands die every day, tens of thousands, in fact, hundreds of thousands, globally. From all kinds of things. Viruses, bacteria, fungi, murder, car crashes, buildings collapsing, fires, floods, storms, monsoons, snakebites, mosquito bites, moose attacks, piranha swarms, shit, you name it and somebody's dying to it, many many someones.

Smoking will kill more people this year, and indeed has thus far. Yet people still smoke. As it turns out, everyone dies. That's not a question. It's not going to stop. It's a fact of life. You can't prevent death. As an adult, you can weigh your risk factors, and live your life at the best equilibrium between risk and reward that you choose.

The attempt to shut down people's lives and remove that choice from them over a relatively benign cold (by the numbers) is the largest breach of liberty imaginable. 19,000 people have died from hunger today, is that because you happen to be supporting closing down the world over a cold? Sweden didn't think so, and their total deaths year to date aren't out of line from any other year in the last decade. Nor, for that matter, are most nations. These are easy stats to note. Prior to lockdowns, after lockdowns, no real spike. What we're really talking of is imposing martial law over something that should be a choice, a risk assessment, that everyone makes for themselves.

Do you believe it's okay to prevent a barber from working for a couple months, and when he's had enough, and goes back to work, yanking his barber's license and slapping him with a several thousand dollar fine? A hair salon where the business owner and employees were denied unemployment and are all at starvation point being fined $14,000 for "daring" to attempt to reopen on the date the lockdown was supposed to end? Why? None of us are children. We can choose our risks. If you believe you need to continue to self-isolate, do so! By all means.

The issue is using government force to actively PREVENT people from earning a livelihood, when states that are extending these lockdowns are also denying unemployment claims that arose as a direct result of the lockdowns themselves.

I can't tell you the number of times I've heard, "Well I hope you get coronavirus and die!" because I don't buy into all the controlling hype. Do you believe that the same people who insist, "Give up your freedoms or be cursed" should be trusted with determining what civil rights should be abridged for other people?

And I ask again, when was the last time the healthy were quarantined to protect the sick or at risk? And why does that even make sense?

All of this is starting to smell like Soros shenanigans.

Not true:




Those are some huge numbers in many countries, and note that these numbers are already dragged down by social distancing and lockdowns. Without those measures, the numbers would look even worse. This becomes even clearer when looking at particularly badly affected cities like New York or London:



I think the misunderstanding is that when you take the average over the entire timespan from January 1st through mid May, you're diluting the impact during the peak corona weeks by lumping them together with the calm first two months of the year.

Another thing to keep in mind is that this chart does include the worst weeks for most European countries, but not for the U.S., so the excess mortality for the U.S. is most definitely higher than 19% by now.




Source:
https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on May 18 2020 06:11pm