Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Topics without replies are pruned every 365 days. Not moderated.

Moderator: Dux

User avatar
newguy
Top
Posts: 2389
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:32 am

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by newguy » Wed Apr 15, 2020 3:43 pm

Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 12:31 pm
That's non-responsive.

So, I'll say it again: If shopping at a grocery store is a sig vector of transmission, then the self-quarantining and physical distancing were useless.
Not really.

That isn't exactly how transmission works. It's percentage and odds game. If I am going to work every single day in an office with the same people and one of them gets it, then the odds of my getting it dramatically increase because of the time I am exposed to them. As does everyone else in my office. I talk to betty every single day, I touch the same shit she touches multiple times a day, etc. etc. It's why we see in factories it's not just one person that gets it, but a whole bunch.

If all I doing is going to the market once a week, my exposure is much more limited. My contact with people much more limited. Etc. My odds of getting a dose of the virus that will make me sick is much lower. And if I get it, the amount of people I expose is much lower.

DrDonkeyLove...
Sarge
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2019 10:29 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by DrDonkeyLove... » Wed Apr 15, 2020 7:50 pm

newguy wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 3:43 pm
Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 12:31 pm
That's non-responsive.

So, I'll say it again: If shopping at a grocery store is a sig vector of transmission, then the self-quarantining and physical distancing were useless.
Not really.

That isn't exactly how transmission works. It's percentage and odds game. If I am going to work every single day in an office with the same people and one of them gets it, then the odds of my getting it dramatically increase because of the time I am exposed to them. As does everyone else in my office. I talk to betty every single day, I touch the same shit she touches multiple times a day, etc. etc. It's why we see in factories it's not just one person that gets it, but a whole bunch.

If all I doing is going to the market once a week, my exposure is much more limited. My contact with people much more limited. Etc. My odds of getting a dose of the virus that will make me sick is much lower. And if I get it, the amount of people I expose is much lower.
Gov. Cuomo issued outlines for opening up today. Basically it's a strategy for what to do until there's a vaccine in 12-18 months.

1. Testing!! He gave a good outline of what's necessary, why there is a ton of work to do, and why the feds have to be heavily involved.

2. Treatments: He gave a list of treatments to be optimistic about but that still need clinical studies such as Hydroxychloriquine.

3. Matrix for opening: Prioritize things that are more essential and things that have limited transmission vectors. He didn't get into details but I suspect that elective surgeries, landscapers, and businesses where people can stay >6' away will go first. Restaurants and bars could go later or implement procedures to limit transmission.

4. Masks: When people can't be 6' away from others they need to wear a mask. Alone on the street or in your car = no mask, on the bus or at a crowded pedestrian intersection = mask. Very broad outlines as to what counts as a mask but it's an executive order. At this time there are no penalties for not following the order.

Bennyonesix1
Gunny
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:51 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Bennyonesix1 » Wed Apr 15, 2020 7:59 pm

newguy wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 3:43 pm
Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 12:31 pm
That's non-responsive.

So, I'll say it again: If shopping at a grocery store is a sig vector of transmission, then the self-quarantining and physical distancing were useless.
Not really.

That isn't exactly how transmission works. It's percentage and odds game. If I am going to work every single day in an office with the same people and one of them gets it, then the odds of my getting it dramatically increase because of the time I am exposed to them. As does everyone else in my office. I talk to betty every single day, I touch the same shit she touches multiple times a day, etc. etc. It's why we see in factories it's not just one person that gets it, but a whole bunch.

If all I doing is going to the market once a week, my exposure is much more limited. My contact with people much more limited. Etc. My odds of getting a dose of the virus that will make me sick is much lower. And if I get it, the amount of people I expose is much lower.
Yeah. Thanks for agreeing that shopping at the grocery store isn't a sig vector of transmission.

Bennyonesix1
Gunny
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:51 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Bennyonesix1 » Wed Apr 15, 2020 8:04 pm

DrDonkeyLove... wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 7:50 pm
newguy wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 3:43 pm
Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 12:31 pm
That's non-responsive.

So, I'll say it again: If shopping at a grocery store is a sig vector of transmission, then the self-quarantining and physical distancing were useless.
Not really.

That isn't exactly how transmission works. It's percentage and odds game. If I am going to work every single day in an office with the same people and one of them gets it, then the odds of my getting it dramatically increase because of the time I am exposed to them. As does everyone else in my office. I talk to betty every single day, I touch the same shit she touches multiple times a day, etc. etc. It's why we see in factories it's not just one person that gets it, but a whole bunch.

If all I doing is going to the market once a week, my exposure is much more limited. My contact with people much more limited. Etc. My odds of getting a dose of the virus that will make me sick is much lower. And if I get it, the amount of people I expose is much lower.
Gov. Cuomo issued outlines for opening up today. Basically it's a strategy for what to do until there's a vaccine in 12-18 months.

1. Testing!! He gave a good outline of what's necessary, why there is a ton of work to do, and why the feds have to be heavily involved.

2. Treatments: He gave a list of treatments to be optimistic about but that still need clinical studies such as Hydroxychloriquine.

3. Matrix for opening: Prioritize things that are more essential and things that have limited transmission vectors. He didn't get into details but I suspect that elective surgeries, landscapers, and businesses where people can stay >6' away will go first. Restaurants and bars could go later or implement procedures to limit transmission.

4. Masks: When people can't be 6' away from others they need to wear a mask. Alone on the street or in your car = no mask, on the bus or at a crowded pedestrian intersection = mask. Very broad outlines as to what counts as a mask but it's an executive order. At this time there are no penalties for not following the order.
Hilarious. He's cost/benefit analyzing the situation. Incredible. The absolute greed and misanthropy from this guy.

I'll give the translation: NY was revenue fucked before this and now we are absolutely revenue fucked and I need revenue so old ppl are going to be put at risk but I have to signal Orange Man Is Very Bad and Karen's were right to be hysterical.

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21020
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Turdacious » Wed Apr 15, 2020 8:26 pm

Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 7:59 pm
newguy wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 3:43 pm
Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 12:31 pm
That's non-responsive.

So, I'll say it again: If shopping at a grocery store is a sig vector of transmission, then the self-quarantining and physical distancing were useless.
Not really.

That isn't exactly how transmission works. It's percentage and odds game. If I am going to work every single day in an office with the same people and one of them gets it, then the odds of my getting it dramatically increase because of the time I am exposed to them. As does everyone else in my office. I talk to betty every single day, I touch the same shit she touches multiple times a day, etc. etc. It's why we see in factories it's not just one person that gets it, but a whole bunch.

If all I doing is going to the market once a week, my exposure is much more limited. My contact with people much more limited. Etc. My odds of getting a dose of the virus that will make me sick is much lower. And if I get it, the amount of people I expose is much lower.
Yeah. Thanks for agreeing that shopping at the grocery store isn't a sig vector of transmission.
CDC continues to study the spread and effects of the novel coronavirus across the United States. We now know from recent studies that a significant portion of individuals with coronavirus lack symptoms (“asymptomatic”) and that even those who eventually develop symptoms (“pre-symptomatic”) can transmit the virus to others before showing symptoms. This means that the virus can spread between people interacting in close proximity—for example, speaking, coughing, or sneezing—even if those people are not exhibiting symptoms. In light of this new evidence, CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain (e.g., grocery stores and pharmacies) especially in areas of significant community-based transmission.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... cover.html
Public settings where social distancing measures are difficult to maintain are significant vectors of transmission.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

Bennyonesix1
Gunny
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:51 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Bennyonesix1 » Wed Apr 15, 2020 8:55 pm

What % wear masks in stores today? How has that changed over time? Because if compliance with CDC recs was and is low (and it was and is) then the spread would have been massive if the R0 was as high as suggested by the CDC et al and transmission was via droplets and aerosol.

Look, you and the CDC may be right. But no one knows. That is all conjecture. There is not even proof that the virus is primarily transmitted via droplets or aerosol.

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21020
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Turdacious » Wed Apr 15, 2020 9:41 pm

Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 8:55 pm
What % wear masks in stores today? How has that changed over time? Because if compliance with CDC recs was and is low (and it was and is) then the spread would have been massive if the R0 was as high as suggested by the CDC et al and transmission was via droplets and aerosol.

Look, you and the CDC may be right. But no one knows. That is all conjecture. There is not even proof that the virus is primarily transmitted via droplets or aerosol.
In my area:
Seniors: high 90s
Asians (all ages): high 90s
People under 30: 50%
Retail Workers: high 90s
Everyone else: 70-80%

My guess is that a lot of people not wearing masks don't have them and would wear them of they had them.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

Bennyonesix1
Gunny
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:51 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Bennyonesix1 » Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:02 pm

Those are pathetic numbers for virus mitigation. And we are seeing a peak in compliance only as of now. Initially it was much much lower. If stores were a sig vector for infection that compliance rate would have rendered it useless as far as spread through the population.

User avatar
Fat Cat
Jesus Christ®
Posts: 39376
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:54 pm
Location: 鬼ヶ島

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Fat Cat » Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:07 pm

This whole Chinese AIDS episode has made one thing clear: Asians fucking love wearing masks.
Image
"You can’t talk with communists, you have to kill them." -Józef Mackiewicz

User avatar
newguy
Top
Posts: 2389
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:32 am

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by newguy » Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:34 pm

Turdacious wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 9:41 pm
Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 8:55 pm
What % wear masks in stores today? How has that changed over time? Because if compliance with CDC recs was and is low (and it was and is) then the spread would have been massive if the R0 was as high as suggested by the CDC et al and transmission was via droplets and aerosol.

Look, you and the CDC may be right. But no one knows. That is all conjecture. There is not even proof that the virus is primarily transmitted via droplets or aerosol.
In my area:
Seniors: high 90s
Asians (all ages): high 90s
People under 30: 50%
Retail Workers: high 90s
Everyone else: 70-80%

My guess is that a lot of people not wearing masks don't have them and would wear them of they had them.
I was at the market and Target yesterday. 95 - 98% of the people (self included) were wearing masks. A couple of homeless people were in Target not wearing any. A couple of younger people also did not have one on.

Several people wearing them were jackasses. A few fools had it under their nose. The worse offenders were the elderly. One woman, obese, in a motorized scooter, kept pulling it down with her hand and then fanning herself. She was not the only old person I saw struggling.

But overall compliance was really high.

My mask game is a black buff doubled up over the mouth and nose with a coffee filter between the layers. It is not particularly comfortable. But I look like a ninja.

User avatar
nafod
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 12049
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:01 pm
Location: Looking in your window

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by nafod » Wed Apr 15, 2020 10:48 pm

Does a ball gag count?
Don’t believe everything you think.

User avatar
SubClaw
Top
Posts: 1902
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2011 5:01 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by SubClaw » Thu Apr 16, 2020 5:33 am

newguy wrote:
Wed Apr 15, 2020 3:43 pm
I talk to betty every single day, I touch the same shit she touches multiple times a day.
Why would you touch Ben's penis... repeatedly?
Image

User avatar
nafod
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 12049
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:01 pm
Location: Looking in your window

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by nafod » Thu Apr 16, 2020 1:41 pm

Image
Don’t believe everything you think.

User avatar
Fat Cat
Jesus Christ®
Posts: 39376
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:54 pm
Location: 鬼ヶ島

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Fat Cat » Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:35 am

Well my State, formerly owner of the lowest unemployment rate in the Country: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/w ... aii-knows/

Now has announced an unemployment rate of 37%: https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2020/04/1 ... continues/

Those are French revolution numbers, BTW. So, to all the "if it saves just one life" people, get fucked.
Image
"You can’t talk with communists, you have to kill them." -Józef Mackiewicz

Bennyonesix1
Gunny
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:51 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Bennyonesix1 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:44 am

https://mobile.twitter.com/kristina_won ... 1717522437


"@USNavy
stats: As of 4/16, 94% of USS Theodore Roosevelt crew members have been tested for COVID-19; 655 positive, 3,919 negative.

4,059 of 4,885 are ashore. Six are hospitalized, one is in the ICU.

According to Reuters, roughly 60% of those positive are asymptomatic."

So, the two controlled experiments in the R0 and fatality rate etc etc: the Disney Princess and this Navy ship tell a very different story than the models and the narrative being presented.

It is impossible for me to reconcile the approach taken with these facts.

And Italy falls apart when the flu hits on the reg.

Bennyonesix1
Gunny
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:51 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Bennyonesix1 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:48 am

Fat Cat wrote:
Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:35 am
Well my State, formerly owner of the lowest unemployment rate in the Country: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/w ... aii-knows/

Now has announced an unemployment rate of 37%: https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2020/04/1 ... continues/

Those are French revolution numbers, BTW. So, to all the "if it saves just one life" people, get fucked.
The Govs are all just jockeying for cover on how to open up. No revenue and collapsing industry and dead service industries and no possibility of running a deficit or declaring BKY means one thing...

And no way in hell Trump is going to let the Blue States turn the US into Zimbabwe with huge money printing in a de-industrialized economy.

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21020
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Turdacious » Fri Apr 17, 2020 3:10 am

Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:44 am
https://mobile.twitter.com/kristina_won ... 1717522437


"@USNavy
stats: As of 4/16, 94% of USS Theodore Roosevelt crew members have been tested for COVID-19; 655 positive, 3,919 negative.

4,059 of 4,885 are ashore. Six are hospitalized, one is in the ICU.

According to Reuters, roughly 60% of those positive are asymptomatic."

So, the two controlled experiments in the R0 and fatality rate etc etc: the Disney Princess and this Navy ship tell a very different story than the models and the narrative being presented.

It is impossible for me to reconcile the approach taken with these facts.

And Italy falls apart when the flu hits on the reg.
Just a guess but I'm going with:
USS TR: Average age: 25; average weight: 175; average PRT score: 260
Disney Princess: Average age: 55; average weight: 375; average PRT score: what's exercise?
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

Bennyonesix1
Gunny
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:51 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Bennyonesix1 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:59 pm

Right. There's no meaningful difference between the two experiments despite those demographic differences.

60% remain asymptomatic for the duration of the illness.

Given these numbers (and especially the realization that intubation and ventilation aren't effective treatments and oxygen is better) I cannot see how this is anything like what it is being portrayed as.

If we aren't venting people, it's not going to overwhelm the system. As the respirator shortage was what they claimed would lead to system failure.

None of this has made any sense to me from the beginning. All I know is ppl in responsibility are lying to us for our own good. Just like with AIDS.

User avatar
Turdacious
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21020
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Turdacious » Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:38 pm

Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:59 pm
Right. There's no meaningful difference between the two experiments despite those demographic differences.

60% remain asymptomatic for the duration of the illness.

Given these numbers (and especially the realization that intubation and ventilation aren't effective treatments and oxygen is better) I cannot see how this is anything like what it is being portrayed as.

If we aren't venting people, it's not going to overwhelm the system. As the respirator shortage was what they claimed would lead to system failure.

None of this has made any sense to me from the beginning. All I know is ppl in responsibility are lying to us for our own good. Just like with AIDS.
The population at highest risk (70+ with some comorbid conditions) is probably about 10% of the US population.
Contrast that with per-capita hospital bed data (2.4 beds per 1000 population): https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicat ... 2asc%22%7D
And the beds aren't evenly distributed.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule

Bennyonesix1
Gunny
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:51 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Bennyonesix1 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 2:58 pm

That's not math. You're just throwing out numbers. You've made no point. I'd post the math for you but I don't like your internet persona.

motherjuggs&speed
Gunny
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2019 6:08 am

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by motherjuggs&speed » Fri Apr 17, 2020 3:11 pm

% of the population that gives a shit about anything else when going broke looks like a real possibility -- 0
Charly Gordon wrote: Num3rs r fun!

User avatar
nafod
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 12049
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:01 pm
Location: Looking in your window

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by nafod » Fri Apr 17, 2020 5:30 pm

Turdacious wrote:
Fri Apr 17, 2020 3:10 am
Just a guess but I'm going with:
USS TR: Average age: 25; average weight: 175; average PRT score: 260
Disney Princess: Average age: 55; average weight: 375; average PRT score: what's exercise?
Damn, Turd, that's not stupid. =D>
Don’t believe everything you think.

User avatar
nafod
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 12049
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:01 pm
Location: Looking in your window

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by nafod » Fri Apr 17, 2020 5:34 pm

Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:59 pm
If we aren't venting people, it's not going to overwhelm the system. As the respirator shortage was what they claimed would lead to system failure.
Just hospital beds in general are important. There's a shit-ton of folks dying at home these days, well above the norm (and not getting counted as COVID mortalities). Access to O2 and someone to roll them over into the prone position (that seems to be a big lesson learned)

We're going to find out what happens when we open things back up here, shortly. I'm able to keep my distance and watch from the sidelines. I expect a surge in cases, maybe massive.
Don’t believe everything you think.

User avatar
Shafpocalypse Now
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21188
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 11:26 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Shafpocalypse Now » Fri Apr 17, 2020 5:51 pm

This virus is taking, in general, the people who would have left the tribe to go and die in the wilderness instead of making their kin care and feed for them, because they could no longer contribute to the tribe's well being.

Nature is scraping the bowl with the help of Covid19

Ugly, I know. This is a reminder the universe doesn't give a fuck about you.

User avatar
Shafpocalypse Now
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 21188
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 11:26 pm

Re: Economy or Minimizing Risk?

Post by Shafpocalypse Now » Fri Apr 17, 2020 5:54 pm

Bennyonesix1 wrote:
Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:59 pm
Right. There's no meaningful difference between the two experiments despite those demographic differences.

60% remain asymptomatic for the duration of the illness.

Given these numbers (and especially the realization that intubation and ventilation aren't effective treatments and oxygen is better) I cannot see how this is anything like what it is being portrayed as.

If we aren't venting people, it's not going to overwhelm the system. As the respirator shortage was what they claimed would lead to system failure.

None of this has made any sense to me from the beginning. All I know is ppl in responsibility are lying to us for our own good. Just like with AIDS.
AIDS was always about minority population control. This is why Magic Johnson was paid by the gov to pretend he had AIDS and to promote condom use. Notice he is AIDS free now? A fucking miracle.

As a side note, I was having a candid conversation with a young woman of color and she told me that her peers have this attitude of "If he isn't man enough to nut inside me and risk getting me pregnant, he's not man enough"

Post Reply