Pages:
Author

Topic: Presidential debates - page 4. (Read 2330 times)

legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
October 11, 2020, 03:30:43 PM
0.13% mortality

I don't even want to know what part of your anatomy you pulled that out of because it doesn't pass the smell test.

212000/0.0013 = half of the US population had COVID-19 and recovered?

deaths / population

212k / 336,000k does not yield .13 percent, but 0.06%.

I'll find the reference.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

The numbers you are looking for are:

217,658/7,831,355 or 2.78%

as of Oct 8th.

mortality of an infection=deaths/# of infections

That's the confirmed case fatality rate. You can't get the mortality of a disease if you don't know how many people have it, and WHO came out and said they think that 10% of the population has gotten COVID-19, meaning over 700 million cases, not 7 million.

What WHO "thinks" is irrelevant.  Mortality rate is always reported using available data. Whether it is cancer cases or influenza infections.

Of course you have people who had COVID-19, have recovered and were not counted in the number of infections.  Just like we have undetected cancers and remissions. Also, we are not including infected/untested people who died in accidents, or had strokes.

The mortality rate of an ongoing disease is a moving target and can change at any moment.  All you can do is report mortality at a specific date, with the available data.  Anything else should be cordially dismissed.
legendary
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2093
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
October 09, 2020, 11:21:27 AM
I believe that the rates of Covid being the SOLE cause of death to be infinitesimally small..

Yeah that's how viruses (or any deadly disease) work.  Nobody died SOLEY from covid.
legendary
Activity: 2296
Merit: 2262
BTC or BUST
October 09, 2020, 11:15:38 AM
I believe that the rates of Covid being the SOLE cause of death to be infinitesimally small..
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
October 08, 2020, 10:59:31 PM
Why are you under the impression that I believe COVID has a 0.13 fatality rate? We need a randomized antibody test to predict the true number of cases and even that may not do it because infection rates vary around the country.

My personal belief, probably .3-.5 percent overall.

I'm sorry, the 0.13% comes from Spendulus who still hasn't explained how he came up with that.

0.5% is quite optimistic but I wouldn't argue with that absent better data.
legendary
Activity: 2828
Merit: 1515
October 08, 2020, 10:44:07 PM
Yeah that's my mistake. I meant the world wide case count that's like 30M+, not just the U.S. case count.

Point being, there are a lot more cases than are confirmed so that drives the fatality rate down from the confirmed case fatality rate.

Ok, I'll play along, even though it's really getting off the topic. 10% of US population is 33 million. AFAIK there have been antibody tests in some locations showing rates up to 20% so let's make it 50 million total or ~15% of population.

50 million times 0.13% = 65 thousand deaths. We have 3+ times as many deaths or 0.4-0.5% fatality rate and that's based on a fairly optimistic assumption above.

Now can we accept that sacrificing people for a TV debate is just not right.


Why are you under the impression that I believe COVID has a 0.13 fatality rate? We need a randomized antibody test to predict the true number of cases and even that may not do it because infection rates vary around the country.

My personal belief, probably .3-.5 percent overall.
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
October 08, 2020, 10:08:35 PM
Be careful about the exact terms and their meaning...

https://sci-hub.se/downloads/2020-08-13/66/[email protected]#view=FitH

Feel free to provide exact terms of your 0.13% claim, preferably in an appropriate thread.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
October 08, 2020, 09:57:03 PM
Yeah that's my mistake. I meant the world wide case count that's like 30M+, not just the U.S. case count.

Point being, there are a lot more cases than are confirmed so that drives the fatality rate down from the confirmed case fatality rate.

Ok, I'll play along, even though it's really getting off the topic. 10% of US population is 33 million. AFAIK there have been antibody tests in some locations showing rates up to 20% so let's make it 50 million total or ~15% of population.

50 million times 0.13% = 65 thousand deaths. We have 3+ times as many deaths or 0.4-0.5% fatality rate and that's based on a fairly optimistic assumption above.

Now can we accept that sacrificing people for a TV debate is just not right.

Be careful about the exact terms and their meaning...

https://sci-hub.se/downloads/2020-08-13/66/[email protected]#view=FitH
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
October 08, 2020, 09:45:04 PM
Yeah that's my mistake. I meant the world wide case count that's like 30M+, not just the U.S. case count.

Point being, there are a lot more cases than are confirmed so that drives the fatality rate down from the confirmed case fatality rate.

Ok, I'll play along, even though it's really getting off the topic. 10% of US population is 33 million. AFAIK there have been antibody tests in some locations showing rates up to 20% so let's make it 50 million total or ~15% of population.

50 million times 0.13% = 65 thousand deaths. We have 3+ times as many deaths or 0.4-0.5% fatality rate and that's based on a fairly optimistic assumption above.

Now can we accept that sacrificing people for a TV debate is just not right.
legendary
Activity: 2828
Merit: 1515
October 08, 2020, 09:09:15 PM
deaths / population

212k / 336,000k does not yield .13 percent, but 0.06%.

I'll find the reference.

That's why I said "half". Your reference must be a doozy but you might want to do this in one of the 1000 threads dedicated to COVID-19 conspiracies because this is really not about debates anymore.

That's the confirmed case fatality rate. You can't get the mortality of a disease if you don't know how many people have it, and WHO came out and said they think that 10% of the population has gotten COVID-19, meaning over 700 million cases, not 7 million.

Apples and cucumbers. 7 million is the US case count. 700 million is 10% of world population.


Yeah that's my mistake. I meant the world wide case count that's like 30M+, not just the U.S. case count.

Point being, there are a lot more cases than are confirmed so that drives the fatality rate down from the confirmed case fatality rate.
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
October 08, 2020, 08:42:17 PM
deaths / population

212k / 336,000k does not yield .13 percent, but 0.06%.

I'll find the reference.

That's why I said "half". Your reference must be a doozy but you might want to do this in one of the 1000 threads dedicated to COVID-19 conspiracies because this is really not about debates anymore.

That's the confirmed case fatality rate. You can't get the mortality of a disease if you don't know how many people have it, and WHO came out and said they think that 10% of the population has gotten COVID-19, meaning over 700 million cases, not 7 million.

Apples and cucumbers. 7 million is the US case count. 700 million is 10% of world population.
legendary
Activity: 2828
Merit: 1515
October 08, 2020, 08:38:34 PM
0.13% mortality

I don't even want to know what part of your anatomy you pulled that out of because it doesn't pass the smell test.

212000/0.0013 = half of the US population had COVID-19 and recovered?

deaths / population

212k / 336,000k does not yield .13 percent, but 0.06%.

I'll find the reference.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

The numbers you are looking for are:

217,658/7,831,355 or 2.78%

as of Oct 8th.

mortality of an infection=deaths/# of infections

That's the confirmed case fatality rate. You can't get the mortality of a disease if you don't know how many people have it, and WHO came out and said they think that 10% of the population has gotten COVID-19, meaning over 700 million cases, not 7 million.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
October 08, 2020, 07:29:33 PM
0.13% mortality

I don't even want to know what part of your anatomy you pulled that out of because it doesn't pass the smell test.

212000/0.0013 = half of the US population had COVID-19 and recovered?

deaths / population

212k / 336,000k does not yield .13 percent, but 0.06%.

I'll find the reference.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

The numbers you are looking for are:

217,658/7,831,355 or 2.78%

as of Oct 8th.

mortality of an infection=deaths/# of infections
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
October 08, 2020, 06:55:29 PM
0.13% mortality

I don't even want to know what part of your anatomy you pulled that out of because it doesn't pass the smell test.

212000/0.0013 = half of the US population had COVID-19 and recovered?

deaths / population

212k / 336,000k does not yield .13 percent, but 0.06%.

I'll find the reference.
legendary
Activity: 2828
Merit: 1515
October 08, 2020, 06:17:44 PM
Virtual debates don't work well but even if they end up doing a virtual debate, Trump isn't going to back out. He needs it way more than Joe Biden does.

I thought an outdoor debate would be a good alternative too. If Trump tests negative, have the debate outdoors to prevent further spread.
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
October 08, 2020, 06:07:53 PM
0.13% mortality

I don't even want to know what part of your anatomy you pulled that out of because it doesn't pass the smell test.

212000/0.0013 = half of the US population had COVID-19 and recovered?
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
October 08, 2020, 04:39:32 PM

I'm skeptical.
Makes sense considering you think global cooling is the greatest threat to the planet.

The planet doesn't care, but civilization does. Other major threats to civilization are solar flares, asteroid impacts, germ and virus, and others. But the historical cycles show ice ages to be incredibly long term and severely impact habitable areas.
legendary
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2093
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
October 08, 2020, 04:37:55 PM
I'll give you this, cause it is totally right.

I suppose everyone who is entering the debate facility could also submit to a test, but even doing that isn't going to rule out everything -- as people could be too early in the process to test positive for a test.

Another day in paradise, lol.

Part of the problem with the White House outbreak is that they put a lot of trust into notoriously unreliable rapid tests while ignoring most of the distancing and mask guidelines. Trump's team refused to wear masks in the first debate. Trump's now sick along with 30+ people linked to the White House. The administration has not been transparent in this whole fiasco. Given all that a virtual debate is absolutely the right decision. Not everyone has a chopper on stand by and a team of doctors with experimental drugs Smiley

Why?

Because they choose to only listen to advice from those most qualified when it's not too inconvenient. 

The rapid testing wasn't too inconvenient.

The rest was.

I'm skeptical.
Makes sense considering you think global cooling is the greatest threat to the planet.
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
October 08, 2020, 04:35:52 PM
I'll give you this, cause it is totally right.

I suppose everyone who is entering the debate facility could also submit to a test, but even doing that isn't going to rule out everything -- as people could be too early in the process to test positive for a test.

Another day in paradise, lol.

Part of the problem with the White House outbreak is that they put a lot of trust into notoriously unreliable rapid tests while ignoring most of the distancing and mask guidelines. Trump's team refused to wear masks in the first debate. Trump's now sick along with 30+ people linked to the White House. The administration has not been transparent in this whole fiasco. Given all that a virtual debate is absolutely the right decision. Not everyone has a chopper on stand by and a team of doctors with experimental drugs Smiley

Why?

Because they choose to only listen to advice from those most qualified when it's not too inconvenient. 

The rapid testing wasn't too inconvenient.

The rest was.

I'm skeptical.

https://www.healthline.com/health/r-nought-reproduction-number

... in 1918 there was a worldwide outbreak of the swine flu that killed 50 million people. According to a review article published in BMC Medicine, the R0 value of the 1918 pandemic was estimated to be between 1.4 and 2.8.

But when the swine flu, or H1N1 virus, came back in 2009, its R0 value was between 1.4 and 1.6, report researchers in the journal Science. The existence of vaccines and antiviral drugs made the 2009 outbreak much less deadly.

COVID-19 R0
The R0 for COVID-19 is a median of 5.7, according to a study published online in Emerging Infectious Diseases.


5.7 simply put means extremely infections. You are going to get it. Period. Masks and distancing might put that off but won't stop it. But the earlier number I mentioned 0.13% mortality, means you won't have much of a higher chance of death than with the common cold.
legendary
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2093
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
October 08, 2020, 04:27:59 PM
I'll give you this, cause it is totally right.

I suppose everyone who is entering the debate facility could also submit to a test, but even doing that isn't going to rule out everything -- as people could be too early in the process to test positive for a test.

Another day in paradise, lol.

Part of the problem with the White House outbreak is that they put a lot of trust into notoriously unreliable rapid tests while ignoring most of the distancing and mask guidelines. Trump's team refused to wear masks in the first debate. Trump's now sick along with 30+ people linked to the White House. The administration has not been transparent in this whole fiasco. Given all that a virtual debate is absolutely the right decision. Not everyone has a chopper on stand by and a team of doctors with experimental drugs Smiley

Why?

Because they choose to only listen to advice from those most qualified when it's not too inconvenient.  

The rapid testing wasn't too inconvenient.

The rest was.
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
October 08, 2020, 04:22:28 PM
Why?

Why what? Why put people at risk for a TV show? Beats me.

Mask Theater

If you want to go bungee jumping without a cord I fully support your right to do so as long as you don't fall on my grandpa.
Pages:
Jump to: