Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Smorbun wrote:
You really are a moron.
You only resort name calling.
Not an argument.
You don't argue with morons. I will occasionally tell you how you are wrong, and also tell you that you are an idiot, but you and I do not argue. We have to be peers for that, and you are not my peer.
agip wrote:
Trump is a looser wrote:
Boris Johnson, UK Prime Minister, and believe in Trump's COV hoax, has been place in intensive care with a bad case of COV.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/06/uk/boris-johnson-coronavirus-hospital-gbr-intl/index.htmlFor the leader of a nuclear power to lose control of the government is a very, very serious problem.
They lost control when Boris the charlatan was selected to lead.
Actual death toll is likely a lot higher in the US.
Ciro wrote:
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/jesus-trump-administration-waited-two-153358785.html
There is a reason Trump delayed for two months.
If hydroxychloroquine becomes an accepted treatment, several pharmaceutical companies stand to profit, including shareholders and senior executives with connections to the president. Mr. Trump himself has a small personal financial interest in Sanofi, the French drugmaker that makes Plaquenil, the brand-name version of hydroxychloroquine.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/us/politics/coronavirus-trump-malaria-drug.htmlReasons wrote:
Ciro wrote:
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/jesus-trump-administration-waited-two-153358785.htmlThere is a reason Trump delayed for two months.
If hydroxychloroquine becomes an accepted treatment, several pharmaceutical companies stand to profit, including shareholders and senior executives with connections to the president. Mr. Trump himself has a small personal financial interest in Sanofi, the French drugmaker that makes Plaquenil, the brand-name version of hydroxychloroquine.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/us/politics/coronavirus-trump-malaria-drug.html
Wow, the swamp has never been murkier.
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/04/trump-and-his-allies-have-financial-ties-to-companies-that-manufacture-untested-drug-hes-touting-for-covid-19-report/An absolute con artist, him and his son in law.
Ciro wrote:
Reasons wrote:
There is a reason Trump delayed for two months.
If hydroxychloroquine becomes an accepted treatment, several pharmaceutical companies stand to profit, including shareholders and senior executives with connections to the president. Mr. Trump himself has a small personal financial interest in Sanofi, the French drugmaker that makes Plaquenil, the brand-name version of hydroxychloroquine.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/us/politics/coronavirus-trump-malaria-drug.htmlWow, the swamp has never been murkier.
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/04/trump-and-his-allies-have-financial-ties-to-companies-that-manufacture-untested-drug-hes-touting-for-covid-19-report/An absolute con artist, him and his son in law.
I predicted several days ago that The Trump Crime Family had a financial interest in that drug Trump was promoting.
P wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
"For those who understand that imperfect data is not the same thing as useless data, today continues a very positive trend for the US."
The crisis has yet to peak and we are told by the health experts will get worse - much worse - before it gets better.
Your infatuation with your figures and your illusory "water-divining" capacities blind you to what is happening in front of your face and what is obvious to so many others. Not only are your posts virtually unreadable, they essentially propagate insights you don't have - you have no epidemiological knowledge or qualifications and this crisis absolutely calls for such knowledge - and your predictions actively mislead. You could be working in the White House.
I assume by now you are very aware how completely wrong you were with this ^ post. And how 100% correct I was with my own. If not, I will make that abundantly clear shortly.
No hard feelings. You are just wrong. Unable to see the forest. And quite incapable of understanding beyond the media headlines as to what is really going on. What is going on is good. Very good. At least from the perspective of getting COVID-19 under control.
Ain't life at your computer screen grand - as the Surgeon General warns that this will be "one of the hardest weeks for Americans" and "a Pearl Harbor - 9/11 moment". I am relieved you aren't responsible for dispensing advice that anyone will listen to. If this was 1942 you would be saying "what is going on is very good", and "under control".
Ha ha, P in World War 2 would be saying, “Neville Chamberlain is correct. Hitler’s annexations of 63% of Germany’s historical homelands shows that he will never try to rule 100% of the world. These numbers prove it.”
Fentrekker wrote:
agip wrote:
For the leader of a nuclear power to lose control of the government is a very, very serious problem.
They lost control when Boris the charlatan was selected to lead.
no.
But seriously...the UK has no formalized succession of command. I'm no expert on the UK, but they have no written constitution spelling out who takes charge when the PM is out of commission.
It's been fine until now, except maybe when Maggie nearly got done blown up.
It is not clear who controls the UK's nuclear weapons.
I mean that's a far less serious crisis than the US has lived through for 3+ years, with an unqualified, evil con man in charge of our nukes. But it's not good.
Armstronglivs wrote:
P wrote:
I assume by now you are very aware how completely wrong you were with this ^ post. And how 100% correct I was with my own. If not, I will make that abundantly clear shortly.
No hard feelings. You are just wrong. Unable to see the forest. And quite incapable of understanding beyond the media headlines as to what is really going on. What is going on is good. Very good. At least from the perspective of getting COVID-19 under control.
Ain't life at your computer screen grand - as the Surgeon General warns that this will be "one of the hardest weeks for Americans" and "a Pearl Harbor - 9/11 moment". I am relieved you aren't responsible for dispensing advice that anyone will listen to. If this was 1942 you would be saying "what is going on is very good", and "under control".
this kind of BS argument is beneath you, armstrongwhatever.
It's stupid, lame and useless.
You want us all to sit on the sidelines and emote - to wail for our losses and not try to figure out what is going on? Is that right?
Do you think after Pearl Harbor Americans were so sad they did not start thinking about how the war was going? During the Battle of Britain the UK military didn't do, you know, projections of what they thought the German Air Force would be capable of and for how long?
Seriously- your criticisms of analysis are absurd.
Drunk, fat, & stupid is no way for Boris to go through life.
4/6 data
The Sunday effect seems to have been in play - Some of Sunday's advances were reversed in Monday's data. To avoid this problem I'll mostly talk about 3 day averages, which continue to improve.
3 day averages of growth of daily deaths:
World: Zero.
Spain: minus 6%
Italy: minus 4%
USA: +8%
The one-day increase for each of those is significantly higher. And French data continue to be problematic - the range of that nation's numbers suggest they are not being compiled consistently. And France is 15% of the world's total so French bad data can skew things day to day.
So let's hope the good trends of last week return.
Certainly the stock market is seeing the same good things happening - it is up 12% in 3 or 4 days and up over 20% from the bottom. Austria is starting to put timelines to paper for ending its economic freeze.
Change in daily deaths over five days. The top number is old, the bottom number is 4/6 data. The improving trend is evident.
96%
104%
153%
93%
127%
117%
167%
95%
59%
100%
92%
120%
76%
72%
100%
88%
31%
55%
56%
39%
45%
70%
56%
4%
7%
P,
What you are not getting in your calculations is that they are crucially dependent on the vagaries of human behaviour - quite apart from the evolving biology of the virus.
Both infection rates and death rates are influenced by social policies, that include social distancing and handwashing - and maybe even the wearing of masks to reduce asymptomatic transmission. Death rates are also influenced by the availability of resources such as ventilators - as well as our vulnerability to the disease. We are not all the same in that regard. These factors - variables - vary from the individual to the state and national level. Consequently, they are not susceptible to exact measurement and will confound any predictions based on the premise that they are constant. The best we can arrive at is an approximation based on two factors, the life of the virus and the rate of transmission as reflected in policies of containment. The latter in particular can only be a generalization and as I said above will depend much on where you live. Hence, predictions about the eventual toll of the virus in the US range between 100,000 at the most optimistic and in excess of 2 million at its worst. Which of those estimates - or anything in between - are realised will quite literally depend on how people choose to behave. How are you going to factor that into your equations?
agip wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Ain't life at your computer screen grand - as the Surgeon General warns that this will be "one of the hardest weeks for Americans" and "a Pearl Harbor - 9/11 moment". I am relieved you aren't responsible for dispensing advice that anyone will listen to. If this was 1942 you would be saying "what is going on is very good", and "under control".
this kind of BS argument is beneath you, armstrongwhatever.
It's stupid, lame and useless.
You want us all to sit on the sidelines and emote - to wail for our losses and not try to figure out what is going on? Is that right?
Do you think after Pearl Harbor Americans were so sad they did not start thinking about how the war was going? During the Battle of Britain the UK military didn't do, you know, projections of what they thought the German Air Force would be capable of and for how long?
Seriously- your criticisms of analysis are absurd.
You don't understand. I am all for analysis but not analysis that fails to account of the reality we are dealing with. Military logicians know that- or they will lose the battle. The same applies to this war. See my further response above to P.
agip wrote:
Fentrekker wrote:
They lost control when Boris the charlatan was selected to lead.
no.
But seriously...the UK has no formalized succession of command. I'm no expert on the UK, but they have no written constitution spelling out who takes charge when the PM is out of commission.
It's been fine until now, except maybe when Maggie nearly got done blown up.
It is not clear who controls the UK's nuclear weapons.
I mean that's a far less serious crisis than the US has lived through for 3+ years, with an unqualified, evil con man in charge of our nukes. But it's not good.
This is not the Cuban missile crisis. I would currently be more concerned about the virus than nuclear weapons. We are nowhere near the brink of nuclear war - anywhere. I remember the crisis in 1962. 2020 bears no relation to those times - thank God.
Armstronglivs wrote:...predictions about the eventual toll of the virus in the US range between 100,000 at the most optimistic and in excess of 2 million at its worst. Which of those estimates - or anything in between - are realised will quite literally depend on how people choose to behave. How are you going to factor that into your equations?
Like P and agip, I have been spending a lot of time and energy looking into the data, and like P I consider the available data to be a real treasure trove of information that can be used effectively to support realistic, if uncertain, projections.
I am not an epidemiologist, but I do have a professional degree and have worked with a wide variety of kinds of data for more than 30 years. My current best estimate of the ultimate death toll in the US is between about 50,000 and 100,000, most likely between 60,000 and 70,000.
I'm not expecting you (or anyone) to put any faith in my opinion. I'm just putting it out there.
And also, the societal behaviors that govern the numbers today and the next couple of weeks are already baked in. If there's a sudden shift to chaos over the next week or two and the whole US population heads out to hug and kiss their neighbors, future trends (out past 2 weeks) may change, but what lies ahead for the next week or two will be unaffected by any change in behavior over that time period.
interested reader wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:...predictions about the eventual toll of the virus in the US range between 100,000 at the most optimistic and in excess of 2 million at its worst. Which of those estimates - or anything in between - are realised will quite literally depend on how people choose to behave. How are you going to factor that into your equations?
Like P and agip, I have been spending a lot of time and energy looking into the data, and like P I consider the available data to be a real treasure trove of information that can be used effectively to support realistic, if uncertain, projections.
I am not an epidemiologist, but I do have a professional degree and have worked with a wide variety of kinds of data for more than 30 years. My current best estimate of the ultimate death toll in the US is between about 50,000 and 100,000, most likely between 60,000 and 70,000.
I'm not expecting you (or anyone) to put any faith in my opinion. I'm just putting it out there.
Those predictions are far lower than those of the CDC, which are based on the optimal application of social distancing provisions. We are not really seeing that. Have you taken into account that there are several states that have not yet imposed a lockdown?
L L wrote:
A reporter asked the doctor a question to confirm or deny Trump's thoughts on a drug he is promoting (probably has stock in it) and Trump steps in to shut the question down and prevent the doctor from answering it.
I'm starting to think more and more that Trump is marketing this drug is a way to help insiders get back some money from the overall stock market crashing.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-reportedly-has-financial-interest-in-hydroxychloroquine-manufacturerFrom the NY Times:
Some associates of Mr. Trump’s have financial interests in the issue. Sanofi’s largest shareholders include Fisher Asset Management, the investment company run by Ken Fisher, a major donor to Republicans, including Mr. Trump. A spokesman for Mr. Fisher declined to comment.
Another investor in both Sanofi and Mylan, another pharmaceutical firm, is Invesco, the fund previously run by Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary. Mr. Ross said in a statement Monday that he “was not aware that Invesco has any investments in companies producing” the drug, “nor do I have any involvement in the decision to explore this as a treatment.”
As of last year, Mr. Trump reported that his three family trusts each had investments in a Dodge & Cox mutual fund, whose largest holding was in Sanofi.