Novel coronavirus introduced to humans in exotic animal meat market.

doublejj

Well-Known Member
I can't wrap my head around what your point is in this?

It's a wide-spread epidemic. Yes, it's likely that scores of people aren't counted as having died due to the virus. Yes, mortality rates are impossible to accurately ascertain. So what? What conclusion are you trying to lead me to?
wash your hands and stay home.....it's worse than were being told
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
wash your hands and stay home.....it's worse than were being told
lulz Also, don't take hydroxychloroquine on the word of Republicans. Do take it if your doctor recommends and writes you a prescription for it. Do not take aquarium tank water treatment pills that contain HQ and don't gargle with bleach no matter how many times I sarcastically state that I do.

The US reported almost 2000 dead yesterday. Total number dead is almost 15,000 and the number who have died is doubling every 5 days. It's bad. REALLY bad. We don't need accuracy in the reported mortality rate due to Covid-19 at six significant figures to know this.

And yes, I'm staying home, washing my hands, not socializing and have only gone to the store twice in the past 30 days. My kids and wife also are sheltering in place. So, yes I'm taking this seriously. But still, it doesn't matter if we under count the number of dead by a few hundred, nor does it matter right now if mortality rate cannot be estimated due to lack of testing. This is a disaster that is still unfolding and we won't know much about what happened until long after we've gotten this under control. We will get this under control. What nobody can say is when it will be under control or how long before a vaccine is available so that we can all see each other again.
 
Last edited:

Grandpapy

Well-Known Member
My ex brother in law passed away day before yesterday cardiac arrest while in the hospital in NV.
They been doing the snowbird thing since they retired 6 mo. ago.
Id like to know if he was positive.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
I can't wrap my head around what your point is in this?

It's a wide-spread epidemic. Yes, it's likely that scores of people aren't counted as having died due to the virus. Yes, mortality rates are impossible to accurately ascertain. So what? What conclusion are you trying to lead me to?
To choose sensationalism over science. To spread fear and panic. To derail my thread.
 

doublejj

Well-Known Member
My ex brother in law passed away day before yesterday cardiac arrest while in the hospital in NV.
They been doing the snowbird thing since they retired 6 mo. ago.
Id like to know if he was positive.
My condolences for your loss bro, but it's likely you'll never know, because he won't be tested. More people are dying of Covid-19 than we will ever know. Take care of yourself brother, be safe.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
wash your hands and stay home.....it's worse than were being told
It depends who you're listening to. It's not nearly as bad as you've been telling. First off, how bad it will be depends on how bad we let it be. Secondly it isn't known how bad it will be. Please quit with the projections. Like I said to others who were making light of it in January, quit with the jokes. By all means, shit post in another thread. You posts are burying my arguments which are researched and include citations.

Yes, we know it's bad. I have been saying that for months.
 

doublejj

Well-Known Member
It depends who you're listening to. It's not nearly as bad as you've been telling. First off, how bad it will be depends on how bad we let it be. Secondly it isn't known how bad it will be. Please quit with the projections. Like I said to others who were making light of it in January, quit with the jokes. By all means, shit post in another thread. You posts are burying my arguments which are researched and include citations.

Yes, we know it's bad. I have been saying that for months.
you can talk to yourself in here if you wish bro...but this is way worse than you have been saying. best of luck
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
I read where the NYC fire dept used to average 45 'found dead' calls a week....they are now at 400 per week and none of them are being tested for Covid-19.....but How many of them died of Covid-19?
Like this shit. Come on man. Rude as fuck. This is completely useless chisme. Like really, obviously this is definitely going to get more attention than the scientific study I posted. This has no fucking value. You're trolling my thread.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
you can talk to yourself in here if you wish bro...but this is way worse than you have been saying. best of luck
No it's not. You didn't even look at the study. You don't even know what I'm saying. You're going for rumor and spreading bullshit. I cited a study saying that the infection is way more widespread than they're saying.

The difference is one of us is accurate.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Dozens — if not hundreds — of coronavirus deaths in New York City will not be included in the Big Apple’s grim tally, because victims died at home without being tested, The Post has learned.
Todman, Thokmey and Louie are among the 80 death investigations involving people who showed signs of the pandemic COVID-19 between March 22 and Tuesday, according to more than 100 cases reviewed by The Post.
None of those cases, though, were included in the total count of New Yorkers claimed by coronavirus because they weren’t tested before dying.
So, I have come around, reluctantly to some of your arguments. Maybe this thing is deadlier than they're saying. Honestly, I have been holding out on making predictions. I honeslty hate predictions.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
With that said, it's only the case fatality rate that will look worse than they're saying. Particularly when the scope of the spread becomes apparent and people actually see just how many people are infected and asymptomatic or unconfirmed. The infection fatality rate will probably be well under 1%.
 

Grandpapy

Well-Known Member
With that said, it's only the case fatality rate that will look worse than they're saying. Particularly when the scope of the spread becomes apparent and people actually see just how many people are infected and asymptomatic or unconfirmed. The infection fatality rate will probably be well under 1%.
About as much as the Coral Reefs. :wall:
 

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
Look, you were one of the ones saying dumb fucking shit all along while I was raising the alarm. Stop being so hostile just because you don't like what I'm saying.

Look how fucking stupid your comment was on January 28th.
Hostile, umm nope not hostile at all and sorry you feel attacked and now I’m assuming desperately trying to hang on to a losing argument. It’s not that I don’t like what your saying at all, it’s more I think your full of shit. As for my January 28th statement, what did I say that was dumb? Please elaborate.
 

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Hostile, umm nope not hostile at all and sorry you feel attacked and now I’m assuming desperately trying to hang on to a losing argument. It’s not that I don’t like what your saying at all, it’s more I think your full of shit. As for my January 28th statement, what did I say that was dumb? Please elaborate.
I just linked it.

Yeah but the flu...
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Look, you were one of the ones saying dumb fucking shit all along while I was raising the alarm. Stop being so hostile just because you don't like what I'm saying.

Look how fucking stupid your comment was on January 28th.
idk, it seems pretty reasonable the way he said it to me:
Budley Doright said:
As much as yes this seems to be bad, keep in mind this.
“While the impact of flu varies, it places a substantial burden on the health of people in the United States each year. CDC estimates that influenza has resulted in between 9 million – 45 million illnesses, between 140,000 – 810,000 hospitalizations and between 12,000 – 61,000 deaths annually since 2010.”
Not trying to minimize this, just keeping it in prospective for now. I’ll hold off on the surgical masks for a bit :o!
Aside from it turning out that we should have been warned harder at that point the world had about a week on us since Trump was busy distracting everyone by buzzing Nascar in his victory lap, it wasn't until he was on his way back from India that the CDC now has been shown to have jumped at the chance to declare 'Holy Shit this is bad' and the world jumped at the same time.

I know you hate it turning into a Trump thread, but he is POTUS and makes it impossible to see strait. But it is also useful in remembering the timeline. His State of the Union was Feb 5th, 14 days after that would have been Feb 19th, (jesus christ) the day Blagoavich was pardoned along with other deplorables and the 'Princess-something' with 600+ people with coronavirus got off in Japan and world deaths from it hit 2k.

Imagine how much better off we would have been if he would have used the power of the State of the Union address to detail a plan and mobilize our country then when it was getting bad.

I agree that people in a full lockdown are going home, sitting down, coughing and sneezing on their computer/phones/tv's countertops/remotes/doornobs etc and just multiplying the virus they shed everywhere that builds up for 17 days where it peaks and starts dying off maintaining a kind of level to what the person shedding it is at, then it should start decreasing as the person overcomes the virus until it completely (hopefully right) decreases to zero 17 days after the person is recovered fully.

So by sending them home, they are getting sicker and sicker until they get hospitalized and that is when they get tested in Michigan anyways.

The lockdown has basically forced people to be safe if they haven't gotten it yet, or if they had but not in a way to get sick. This starts to get into an area I don't feel like I know enough to understand the scientific differences between who/what/where/when and how of the tests.

And people who are asymptomatic who have been on lockdown stay really infective and not know it could re-infect everyone when they go back to work.

But that said, I think you are putting too much faith in the numbers meaning something here. And so far we are and haven't been on lockdown to know how it would have worked out if we did go on it when it actually mattered.
 

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
idk, it seems pretty reasonable the way he said it to me:


Aside from it turning out that we should have been warned harder at that point the world had about a week on us since Trump was busy distracting everyone by buzzing Nascar in his victory lap, it wasn't until he was on his way back from India that the CDC now has been shown to have jumped at the chance to declare 'Holy Shit this is bad' and the world jumped at the same time.

I know you hate it turning into a Trump thread, but he is POTUS and makes it impossible to see strait. But it is also useful in remembering the timeline. His State of the Union was Feb 5th, 14 days after that would have been Feb 19th, (jesus christ) the day Blagoavich was pardoned along with other deplorables and the 'Princess-something' with 600+ people with coronavirus got off in Japan and world deaths from it hit 2k.

Imagine how much better off we would have been if he would have used the power of the State of the Union address to detail a plan and mobilize our country then when it was getting bad.

I agree that people in a full lockdown are going home, sitting down, coughing and sneezing on their computer/phones/tv's countertops/remotes/doornobs etc and just multiplying the virus they shed everywhere that builds up for 17 days where it peaks and starts dying off maintaining a kind of level to what the person shedding it is at, then it should start decreasing as the person overcomes the virus until it completely (hopefully right) decreases to zero 17 days after the person is recovered fully.

So by sending them home, they are getting sicker and sicker until they get hospitalized and that is when they get tested in Michigan anyways.

The lockdown has basically forced people to be safe if they haven't gotten it yet, or if they had but not in a way to get sick. This starts to get into an area I don't feel like I know enough to understand the scientific differences between who/what/where/when and how of the tests.

And people who are asymptomatic who have been on lockdown stay really infective and not know it could re-infect everyone when they go back to work.

But that said, I think you are putting too much faith in the numbers meaning something here. And so far we are and haven't been on lockdown to know how it would have worked out if we did go on it when it actually mattered.
Yes I thought it was a reasonable statement as well, thanks!!!
 
Top