Stopped paying attention after you claimed 100% infection. As a self-proclaimed medical professional, you should know better.



People die. Every day. You've made completely unsubstantiated claims about how many people might possibly have been saved due to lockdowns, travel restrictions, etc. but then turned around and claimed NY's lockdown was a "good job". What? You're honestly claiming locking down your population and sending infected patients to the highest risk areas (nursing homes) and seeing the worst mortality rates in the world is "well timed"? Bottom line: Hospitals can do what they can do. If they cannot handle patient load, then it's time to triage and only take those cases they can save that are severe. We see this played out in wartime, and we see this played out during every other plague or sickness. You talk about "Well timed" lockdowns, but there's no good timing for a lockdown. You bring up Washington, but what the fuck does Washington have to do with lockdowns? That's a state and local matter. The only "locking down" the federal government can impose is travel restrictions. And the travel restrictions that were imposed did not even impact supply chains. Like literally, nothing you're saying addresses anything beyond the fact that you're concerned about hospital capacity. I tell you that due to policy prescriptions advised by medical professionals, 100 milllion + people will starve to death by May, and you tell me that what, it's not an issue because hospitals in 13 states are at 100% capacity right now? So fucking what?

Couple anecdotal mistakes doesn’t mean anything in regards to the volume of cases and the decline seen. Same with any country that has implemented a properly timed lockdown. Sending patients to nursing homes prematurely was of course a mistake, it’s important to recognize that. However your stance is completely incongruent because you are simultaneously advocating for wartime efforts and level handling but condemning inevitable mistakes along the way, all the while ignoring the objective data in regards to timing of xyz mitigations with subsequent case load

Washington can, obviously, provide the much needed financial Assistance that is required. You know, because the health aspect and financial aspect while linked are different.

“Completely unsubstantiated claims” , geez it’s almost like you can predict the degree of illness, illness severity, hospitalizations, and deaths based on country disease prevalence it’s also miraculous that we can determine how Velocity of spread is impacted by xyz mitigation based on 9 months of global data

I am concerned about both financial implications and health implications. Your lack of foresight into one of these issues, and the exaggerated link you are placing between both of them, make your foresight into the problemS erroneous.

This post was edited by Bazi on Dec 21 2020 12:09pm

Name a nation that has implemented a "properly timed lockdown". I'm incredibly curious to see this.

Washington has provided some financial assistance. But how much do you think they can provide? I mean, they did a great job with ventilators and hospital funding. But at what point do you draw the line? And how exactly are they supposed to just "make it happen"? Congress controls the purse, and it took 8 months to get a bill that should have been a no-brainer past Pelosi. Every time California Dems want to add a couple trillion extra to a relief bill that will be applied to unrelated matters, is everyone supposed to just give in and hand all the wealth of the entire nation over to California?

Now that's a funny statement. They were predicting a mortality rate many times higher than it actually was, they were claiming that it had a much more severe impact on the working age population, and even now, you're claiming that the working age should not be allowed to work because that will interfere with the at-risk group's ability to... Shop? I guess? I mean, you really offer no plans, no alternatives, you merely predict doom and gloom, and make, again, unsubstantiated claims that lockdowns are "helping".

So, since you've not introduced any form of workable solution with all of your "medical professional knowledge" how about I go back to the workable plan I posted way back in April, and have reposted ad nauseum ever since: No mandatory lockdowns period. No quarantines period. Warn the populace based on the factual numbers, do NOT hide the numbers, and those groups in the highest risk category can be incentivised to self-quarantine. Case load resulting from this approach will be higher, but the majority of cases won't be severe enough for hospitalization (since, uh, they're not). High risk group (elderly, respiratory and circulatory comorbidities) can be incentivized pretty much until a Vaccine is created at lower cost than relief packages. No supply chains are broken, no protests, no panics, no 40 million evictions, no mass starvation.

It's not that hindsight is 20/20. It's the fact that what we're now facing was predicted by every single analyst who urged against lockdowns. There are still coronavirus strains floating around that were first experienced in the 70's. During cold/flu season, they just magically reemerge. They'll be with us for ages. As will this one. So, time for a mandatory needle in the arm? Maybe mandatory booster needles every few years? What about when the next cold comes around? Time for another lockdown? More business closures, more evictions?

You always do this and it makes me laugh every time. You go out of your way to ignore the real point being made and nitpick a small piece of phrasing. Oh wow, he said 100% instead of "nearly 100%". Got em! That definitely destroys his argument! It's a really weak style of argument that only dissuades others from taking your arguments seriously.

Make a real point. You claim to be a medical professional. I don't. If you are an actual professional, you should not need to exaggerate your case, and you should be aware of and prepared to utilize facts, not hyperbole. But since you're so butthurt, let's address your "point":

You have no idea what percentage of the population has caught the virus, because the majority of the population has not been tested, AND the most commonly used form of test is not accurate. For all you know, half the population could already have caught the virus and be (for all intents and purposes) immune. You simply don't know. You're working off maybes and assumptions. And all of your maybes and assumptions, since day 1, have tended to overexaggerate hospital load, death rates, and underexaggerate case loads.

BTW, remember earlier how I mentioned that there are a bit over 900K staffed hospital beds in the US? And how I mentioned earlier in the week how covid only make up a tiny portion of beds being used? That's because it's a fucking FACT, not your bullshit conjecture. These numbers are actively reported. There are 112K beds currently being used by covid patients. So if your doom and gloom shit is so out of control, where the fuck is the excess load of patients?

Lot of nonsense in this post tbh

-Technically speaking the mid risk demographic encompasses the largest amount of hospitalizations

-the bolded is a lie

-you say “what more is Washington supposed to do” simultaneously bashing Pelosi (rightfully so might I add but incongruent Nonetheless). The ventilator /PPE examples are absolutely HORRENDOUS examples, it seems now after a couple back and forths you’re just talking out of your ass. Feds mandated xyz private companies, bought at discounted prices. Gave products to newly made abc companies for distribution, who ended up marking up the supplies 400% and created unnecessary bidding wars to cities and states. Ask yourself this, if all the countries in the world are affected, why is America in an exclusive category with the degree of evictions that are set to take place? How many other countries across the world bought Boeing corporate bonds with tax payer dollars?

-the picture u paint that by keeping mom and pop stores open that supply chains are unaffected is incredibly naive. Has the demand for cocacola changed over the last 9 months? Why are they having waves of lay off currently?

Every post u make has so many conflicting statements in addition to absurd presumptions, it’s hard to keep up.

WARTiMe manAgEmeNt guYz, oMG cuOmo SeNT grandMA baCK tOo soOn when hoSpiTALS NeEDed bEDs!!1

Your post is neither funny nor particularly factual.

"Mid-risk" is just a deflection. Age 65+ is all high risk, and accounts for 60-88% of covid hospitalizations (depending on locale). That's the majority. Period. Done. Factual numbers! See how that works?


This is the claim that initiated the lockdowns in the first place. The more you repeat it, the more you are showing support for more and longer lockdowns. As long as you continue to claim that hospital metrics matter more than the entire working age population, the economy, supply chains, etc, you are seriously just promoting more quarantining of the healthy to protect the sick.

You're saying words, they aren't particularly great words, but just to address your little ventilator speech: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/18/ventilators-coronavirus-stockpile/ bidding wars were not necessary. They declined to provide states with excess ventilators because the states did not need them. It's not the federal governments job to give the states whatever they demand. It's the federal government's job to assess what they need. If there was a markup, so what? Hospitals are being provided higher levels of compensation for covid patients, and even higher compensation yet for those put on ventilators. Feel free to go check out USA Today's fact check. Hint: It's "True".

It's interesting when you start referring to "mom and pop stores". 1/3rd of the workforce has either been laid off or had their business locked down over covid nationally. These are not small numbers, and they impact nearly every industry.

Every post you make appears to want to deflect what a disaster the "medical professional advised lockdowns" have turned into. Why not just admit it was a complete disaster, the impacts are going to be many times more devastating, not just to the US, but the entire globe, than the Virus would have been completely unchecked?

You want to justify 5 governors having covid positive patients sent back to nursing homes to mass infect the high risk population and cause mass death, while at the same time claiming that "well timed" lockdowns probably could have helped stop infections and death? What?

40 million evictions. 100 million to 270 million to starve by May. All due to policy makers listening to the "sky is falling" predictions of medical professionals. Hope it helps you sleep better.

We know a majority has not caught the virus or we would see slowing community spread. You are making a lot of assumptions about the state of knowledge. We do not need to test everybody to have a reasonable estimate of the infection rate and immunity rate.

Let's do some envelope calculations

Let's be generous and say that 50% of us have caught the virus. That's exceedingly unlikely, but let's say for the sake of argument that it's the case. Now let's assume that we perfectly quarantine all people above 65 but everybody else goes about normally. You would have seen nearly 100% infection of the population within a month or two. Since it's exponential spread, that means the majority of those cases would have been in the second month, but let's be generous and say that it's equal spread 50% one month, and 50% the second. Basically that means you would take all the hospitalization under 65 that we've had so far and squish them into 1 month and that will last for 2 months. (Again, these are exceedingly generous assumptions)

The total number of hospitalizations for those below 65 in the country can be found here and are per 100k population (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1122354/covid-19-us-hospital-rate-by-age/)

So if we take those rates, multiply by their populations divided by 100k (populations found here https://www.statista.com/statistics/241488/population-of-the-us-by-sex-and-age/) and we get about 225k hospitalizations. This is already not trivial. An increase of 225k hospitalizations in a month would already put areas of the country with low beds per capita on the ropes, and that increases lethality.

Now, let's be clear. These are insanely generous assumptions. Let's start taking away some generosity.

We are not near 50% infection or we would have seen a significant slow of community spread. In reality we're likely closer to 20% infections, but to keep being generous let's say that we're only at 33% infection. So that 225k goes up to 337.5k. Now let's not assume it's evenly spread across two months, because exponential spread means more are going to be in the second month. So that second month goes up to 75% of the total cases (in reality it would be 90% or higher) so now we're up to 506k cases.

I think you see where this is going. Loosening the generosity of the assumptions even slightly already takes us from about 25% capacity dedicated only to Covid to over 50%, and that's to say nothing of other causes. If we were to take realistic numbers for the general population and include even a small percentage of over 65 infections and we're well over the capacity of the entire nation, ignoring that certain areas have more people and would be at capacity even sooner.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Dec 21 2020 02:09pm

Fortunately risk stratification doesn't take into account what InsaneBob thinks. there are fairly specific criteria which separate a mid risk individual vs. a high risk individual, and this distinction matters because it impacts both rate of hospitalization and mortality. Contrary to bob's erroneous belief system, being 65+ exclusively is not indicative of a high risk patient. 60% of America is within the mid risk+high risk demographic




ill just combine the rambling thoughts

to reiterate my view: lockdown is not an option right now, despite the health benefits, due to the financial implications it would have. at no point did I state hospital metrics matter more, as evidence by my repeated view that a lockdown is not an option right now. you are having some difficulty with reading comprehension. here I'll copy paste what I wrote just an hour ago, if you have difficulty understanding the semantics behind the words I can word it another way if the quoted is too complicated. just let me know.



since you backtrack and then dodge ill reiterate. contrary to your rhetorical words of "what more can Washington do?" - they could have done a lot. they had a lot more GDP they could have offered to the real struggling low/middle class instead of buying Boeing and Apple corporate bonds. instead mcconnel and Pelosi sat on their idle hands while America suffered. the majority of the first world gave monthly installments from starting in the early summer for the rest of the year. this is a luxury we absolutely could have afforded. unfortunately you have the secretary treasury boasting about the 93% employment statistic and negating the looming mortgage crisis all together.




NY MI and IL were simultaneously all in bidding wars with each other in march for ventilators that were march. I'm not talking about the federal stock pile which is actually the article u mentioned and ergo completely irrelevant, but the materials that were produced through the defense production act. ventilators, high Flow machines like optiflow, surgical masks, gowns, all marked up when the purpose of giving funds for these goods was a national emergency, not capitalistic gain.

at bold - this is business as usual for critical patients, are you attempting to argue that hospital systems could handle this excess strain due to the fractions extra they receive from these means? the majority of hospital income is made through procedural entities which were in large delayed/postponed. why do you think you saw waves of furloughed hospital employees going into the summer? hospitals right now are more cash strapped than they have ever been in American history. secondly this is a mute point because it was the states that largely took the role of purchasing ventilators/PPE so this really is a non point. you are clearly out of your depth.

the rest of the country was in bidding wars for masks marked up actually 500+%. in fact disposable gowns are no longer a thing in over half the hospitals in the country as a cost saving measure and hospitals are actually using reusable/washable gowns now.

you are simultaneously stating they aren't marked up, then they were marked up but thats ok because than can afford it and the reason for the mark up is just. just mind boggling words.




precisely my point. the temporary lockdowns that have been implemented in the US are not the reason for this degree of layoffs, it is because global supply chains have been so largely impacted, and will continue to be. it isn't as basic as oh keep the small business open! the public was ALWAYS going to require financial federal assistance. there are MANY sectors that are impacted by this what will be without a job regardless of state of a temporary lockdown or not. coke just laid off ~20% of its workforce because GLOBAL revenue fell ~8 billion (off memory here).



it's getting painful tbh





then this gem



Are you aware that a person can test positive for up to 30 days despite being deemed recovered? Mistakes will happen, as I have stated. You cannot be critical of some of these mistakes while simultaneously arguing:

Do you think it was Cuomo et al that pressed the discharged button or a hospital in need of beds?

lets hear more words of wisdom from drunk bob.

This post was edited by Bazi on Dec 21 2020 02:11pm

Bazi mate, you are in JSP what I am on facebook. I can therefore only assume that you also have a fanbase amongst your friends on JSP by now.
You do realize, I assume, that we're talking to deaf ears?

But it's fun regardless. I wish I had the time to both read and reply, but I do not. Keep it coming though -- you may not persuade bob, but people who follow your conversation may be incited to act the way they should regarding the pandemic.

Regards,
Rik