THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
82 deaths in Georgia today. Another big number there.
Why is the spike in Georgia deaths so far behind that of Fla given it actually ended it's lockdown earlier?
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
82 deaths in Georgia today. Another big number there.
Why is the spike in Georgia deaths so far behind that of Fla given it actually ended it's lockdown earlier?
Fat hurts wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Dude, there are plenty that have not sipped the cool aid. Just because there is a list of professors who want to keep schools closed does not mean there is not an equally longer, actually longer list, of those that do but everyone has been silenced by the "shut up I am right, I said science!" crowd that the scientific world has been stifled with threat of career ruin for speaking out against alarmists like yourself. You also did not prove any one wrong, there is still no evidence we should be shutting things back down this fall, particularly schools. How about you do some digging on what has happened in nations were schools have already opened back up.....want to know the answer? Nothing. Schools are not the problem and children should not suffer for your politics of claim and yell.
So now you are saying there is a worldwide scientific conspiracy?
Did I get that right?
It is a conspiracy but it is not scientific and is not worldwide in that the bosses are not worldwide
This is all colonialism brought home.
"The Covid-19 pandemic has brought about unique challenges for governments and public health authorities across the world. It has also provided them with exceptional legal and judicial powers to restrict and control people’s lives and livelihoods. But while the virus may be new, the modes of its control and prevention are not. Key aspects of the outbreak of Covid-19 and the measures to control it have historical and colonial legacies. Although the lockdown and the restrictions on public life in India appear unprecedented, they reproduce measures that colonial governments and public health officials had used to segregate, isolate, and confine people during epidemics.
These measures include the legal provisions used for control, the development of experimental vaccines, the tracing of the asymptomatic carriers, the asymmetrical social and economic consequences, and the violation of basic human rights, particularly those of the poor and marginalised communities. Historically, governments have sought to deal with largescale epidemic outbreaks through isolation and vaccination, both of which are at play in dealing with Covid-19. The extraordinary powers assumed by governments to undertake this twin task raise questions of ethics, human rights, and the use of state powers over the lives and bodies of its citizens.
Colonialism provided the first model of using scientific means of pandemic control for the large-scale and often coercive regulation of people’s lives and livelihoods [...] In times of crisis, postcolonial governments, health officials, and privileged citizens keep returning to these familiar patterns of self-preservation.
The instances of pandemic control in South Asia in the colonial past are vital to revisit. They illustrate the precedents of how political and social power operates in such times. Colonialism provided the first model of using scientific means of pandemic control for the large-scale and often coercive regulation of people’s lives and livelihoods. This model has been useful for states in the current crisis. In times of crisis, postcolonial governments, health officials, and privileged citizens keep returning to these familiar patterns of self-preservation, which often add to the suffering of the most vulnerable."
India’s lockdowns and questionable experimentation with vaccines and drugs to fight Covid-19 eerily mimic its colonial past.The Covid-19 pandemic has brought about unique challenges for governments and public health authorities across the world. It has also provided them with exceptional legal and...
Unclear. The end of the lockdown was not the trigger for this recent surge. It seems like it was a change in behavior in June. Lot more gathering at bars, parties, holiday weekends etc. Heat could be a factor pushing people indoors.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Dude, nice MO. You claim you have proven you are right by posting list of articles where the first one says you are wrong....mostly you just claim you are right. It is a fine strategy to keep claiming you are right and smarter than everyone without showing proof. Yes, there are plenty of people that think lock downs work enough that they are necessary, but like the very first articles states there is no direct evidence they do; most of it is based on modeling studies. Which, is fine and provides some direction, but can easily be very wrong. Your claim is the science is settled and everyone who disagrees is just stupid,, but you don't even know what the science is, you just take a dump and the floor and say "science, see, I am right....I showed you science stuff". The science is definitely not settled on lockdowns, there are camps of scientists on both sides and the data in the middle is minimal and muddy. Please don't ever get into science, or change your approach a bit, or you are going to be leveled at every conference you go to and every time you open your mouth to present anything. In the end ,the point is not that they absolutely don't work, I don't think they work well enough to be worth the cost and there still is no direct evidence that lockdowns are effective enough to be a critical measure governments must put into place; and again, almost every nation where forced stay at home orders put in place observed greater decimation due to the virus. Maybe that is just because the virus hit them hard and other places not; but all of the places getting hit now that did not shut down are not getting hit as hard as the places that did earlier. Closing school again would be a disaster, not only for the kids but for the country; there is definitely no reason to do so other than the politics of idiots, and if you think Ivy League professors are free of idiocy and being political, I know many, you are a total lost cause to the religion of "experts"....2505 awaits you.
If the data in the middle is minimal and muddy, you should be able to post at least a few preprints/articles with actual analysis that supports your claims.
Simply saying "almost every nation where forced stay at home orders put in place observed greater decimation due to the virus," is not evidence. Many of the articles posted clearly are aware of this and attempt to use more sophisticated methods than looking at excel graphs to tease our correlations.
So far you have been presented with a lot of evidence and said "well it's not PROOF," and then lectured people about the scientific community apparently demanding 100% certainty of causation.
You seem smart enough to know that it's going to be impossible to show evidence of causation at this point in time. Clearly we have to work from the best available evidence, and I have seen a mountain of it on one side, and a few sentences of unsourced conjecture from you.
The fact that you've floated the idea that "all professors are in a conspiracy to make lockdowns look good because they don't want to work" (or something like that), suggests that you might be running out of steam here.
Obvi wrote:
Obvi wrote:
That's two (Tue, Wed).
That's three.
That's four.
Hate to always be right on these things. :-(
Fat hurts wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Dude, there are plenty that have not sipped the cool aid. Just because there is a list of professors who want to keep schools closed does not mean there is not an equally longer, actually longer list, of those that do but everyone has been silenced by the "shut up I am right, I said science!" crowd that the scientific world has been stifled with threat of career ruin for speaking out against alarmists like yourself. You also did not prove any one wrong, there is still no evidence we should be shutting things back down this fall, particularly schools. How about you do some digging on what has happened in nations were schools have already opened back up.....want to know the answer? Nothing. Schools are not the problem and children should not suffer for your politics of claim and yell.
So now you are saying there is a worldwide scientific conspiracy?
Did I get that right?
Um no, I am saying there is not a world wide consensus on anything you are saying despite the fact that you believe that is so. Your 150 professors constitutes 0.01 % of the roughly 1.5 million academic faculty in the USA alone, far from a consensus on school closings....and then there is this from the experts at the CDC which you trust so much:
https://thehill.com/homenews/news/508842-cdc-releases-updated-guidelines-in-favor-of-reopening-schoolsSo, you can trust the whiny OCD obsessed 0.01 % of academia or you could trust the rest sitting silent in agreement with the CDC on opening schools.
Harambe wrote:
[quote]Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Dude, nice MO. You claim you have proven you are right by posting list of articles where the first one says you are wrong....mostly you just claim you are right. It is a fine strategy to keep claiming you are right and smarter than everyone without showing proof. Yes, there are plenty of people that think lock downs work enough that they are necessary, but like the very first articles states there is no direct evidence they do; most of it is based on modeling studies. Which, is fine and provides some direction, but can easily be very wrong. Your claim is the science is settled and everyone who disagrees is just stupid,, but you don't even know what the science is, you just take a dump and the floor and say "science, see, I am right....I showed you science stuff". The science is definitely not settled on lockdowns, there are camps of scientists on both sides and the data in the middle is minimal and muddy. Please don't ever get into science, or change your approach a bit, or you are going to be leveled at every conference you go to and every time you open your mouth to present anything. In the end ,the point is not that they absolutely don't work, I don't think they work well enough to be worth the cost and there still is no direct evidence that lockdowns are effective enough to be a critical measure governments must put into place; and again, almost every nation where forced stay at home orders put in place observed greater decimation due to the virus. Maybe that is just because the virus hit them hard and other places not; but all of the places getting hit now that did not shut down are not getting hit as hard as the places that did earlier. Closing school again would be a disaster, not only for the kids but for the country; there is definitely no reason to do so other than the politics of idiots, and if you think Ivy League professors are free of idiocy and being political, I know many, you are a total lost cause to the religion of "experts"....2505 awaits you.
If the data in the middle is minimal and muddy, you should be able to post at least a few preprints/articles with actual analysis that supports your claims.
Simply saying "almost every nation where forced stay at home orders put in place observed greater decimation due to the virus," is not evidence. Many of the articles posted clearly are aware of this and attempt to use more sophisticated methods than looking at excel graphs to tease our correlations.
So far you have been presented with a lot of evidence and said "well it's not PROOF," and then lectured people about the scientific community apparently demanding 100% certainty of causation.
You seem smart enough to know that it's going to be impossible to show evidence of causation at this point in time. Clearly we have to work from the best available evidence, and I have seen a mountain of it on one side, and a few sentences of unsourced conjecture from you.
Many of the articles out there trying to address this state clearly this is a muddy issue and that there is not a lot of strong data on this; geez, the very first article this guy posted made this very clear right in the abstract:
How many times does it have to be posted:
"Governments around the world are responding to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic1 with unprecedented policies designed to slow the growth rate of infections. Many actions, such as closing schools and restricting populations to their homes, impose large and visible costs on society, but their benefits cannot be directly observed and are currently understood only through process-based simulations2–4."
The the study present as proof goes on to look at transmission rate increases assuming they would be less than an assumed 38%, and then declare everything everyone did as a whole was successful because rates were not 38%; so now beating the assumed model prediction mean what we did worked? We are doomed as a species if this is considered a sound scientific basis; the researchers did a great job with the work, but the value of it is still limited and prior to it declare that what is understood is limited. DO I need to go through each article and find every instance someone did research on the topic and also acknowledges the limited amount of info we really have. It is a difficult problem to answer, hence the answers are still very muddy despite what the Faux-Science liberals want to believe. Remember, some scientists cave to politics, so some studies are biased, but most do not, hence the miniscule list of professors demanding schools stay closed while everyone else and most of the students are silently chomping at the bit to get back to business, the business the CDC still reccomends happens and is important.
L'Oncle wrote:
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
82 deaths in Georgia today. Another big number there.
Why is the spike in Georgia deaths so far behind that of Fla given it actually ended it's lockdown earlier?
Good point.
The answer is because there is little actual evidence lockdowns are critical, only models full of assumptions or comparisons of the actual data to model based expectations, but people on Letsrun don't like to read the papers they use to establish the validity of their arguments.
I am 100% sure that this whole 4 pages argument started because someone delcared that the only thing we do know is that lock downs work; which is not true; it may not be a bad idea for a bit, but we don't have good data on it. There is much more clear evidence that targeted quarantines of the sick, testing and tracing, and even mask are effective on their own and actually this combination coupled with the encouragement, not mandating, of social distancing and work from home has been the MO for all nations that have been most successful....S Korea, Denmark, Hungary (although they briefly closed), Norway, Finland, etc.....Sweden did nothing, they should have done something, but locking down is not it and not what their neighbors actually did. Denmark, only 600 deaths to date 100/Million, actually opened its schools right after Easter with absolutly no problems...yet apparently we are too dumb in the US to do this as well
Harambe wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Dude, nice MO. You claim you have proven you are right by posting list of articles where the first one says you are wrong....mostly you just claim you are right. It is a fine strategy to keep claiming you are right and smarter than everyone without showing proof. Yes, there are plenty of people that think lock downs work enough that they are necessary, but like the very first articles states there is no direct evidence they do; most of it is based on modeling studies. Which, is fine and provides some direction, but can easily be very wrong. Your claim is the science is settled and everyone who disagrees is just stupid,, but you don't even know what the science is, you just take a dump and the floor and say "science, see, I am right....I showed you science stuff". The science is definitely not settled on lockdowns, there are camps of scientists on both sides and the data in the middle is minimal and muddy. Please don't ever get into science, or change your approach a bit, or you are going to be leveled at every conference you go to and every time you open your mouth to present anything. In the end ,the point is not that they absolutely don't work, I don't think they work well enough to be worth the cost and there still is no direct evidence that lockdowns are effective enough to be a critical measure governments must put into place; and again, almost every nation where forced stay at home orders put in place observed greater decimation due to the virus. Maybe that is just because the virus hit them hard and other places not; but all of the places getting hit now that did not shut down are not getting hit as hard as the places that did earlier. Closing school again would be a disaster, not only for the kids but for the country; there is definitely no reason to do so other than the politics of idiots, and if you think Ivy League professors are free of idiocy and being political, I know many, you are a total lost cause to the religion of "experts"....2505 awaits you.
If the data in the middle is minimal and muddy, you should be able to post at least a few preprints/articles with actual analysis that supports your claims.
Simply saying "almost every nation where forced stay at home orders put in place observed greater decimation due to the virus," is not evidence. Many of the articles posted clearly are aware of this and attempt to use more sophisticated methods than looking at excel graphs to tease our correlations.
So far you have been presented with a lot of evidence and said "well it's not PROOF," and then lectured people about the scientific community apparently demanding 100% certainty of causation.
You seem smart enough to know that it's going to be impossible to show evidence of causation at this point in time. Clearly we have to work from the best available evidence, and I have seen a mountain of it on one side, and a few sentences of unsourced conjecture from you.
The fact that you've floated the idea that "all professors are in a conspiracy to make lockdowns look good because they don't want to work" (or something like that), suggests that you might be running out of steam here.
Here, fresh off the presses and in line with what I have been trying to say; "lock downs" are not necessary and not effective; targeted measures are better:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260v1.full.pdfThe written about in the daily mail:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8553929/Lockdowns-DONT-work-study-claims.htmlThere is no mountain of evidence. You just fell for a media "science" lie hook line and sinker. Again, it seems like a good idea for a bit, and bit might help, maybe, but little evidence is there to actually warrant it and the devastation it causes is too immense.
7/24/20 data
More of the same - hitting new highs.
Only positive is that in the 4 problem states the rate of growth of deaths has slowed. That marker has been dropping fairly steadily and hit a new low of 17% week over week. If that trend continues and we extrapolate, deaths in the four problem states will start falling in 5-10 days.
But still:
US: New cyclical high
Brazil: on a plateau very near all time high
India: all time high.
World: New cyclical high
FL: all time high
AZ: On a plateau very near all time high
CA: all time high
TX: all time high.
What a colossal failure. 643, 412 deaths.
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
Unclear. The end of the lockdown was not the trigger for this recent surge. It seems like it was a change in behavior in June. Lot more gathering at bars, parties, holiday weekends etc. Heat could be a factor pushing people indoors.
I can read the official narrative online or in any newspaper.
It is BS
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31035-7/fulltext#%20https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/04/62572/https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/22/there-is-no-empirical-evidence-for-these-lockdowns/https://www.conservativereview.com/news/horowitz-analysis-j-p-morgan-shows-lockdowns-dont-help/https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-05-21/coronavirus-lockdowns-haven-t-proved-they-re-worth-the-havochttps://www.newswars.com/do-lockdowns-work-mounting-evidence-says-no/https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/There is no mountain of evidence. You just fell for a media "science" lie hook line and sinker. Again, it seems like a good idea for a bit, and bit might help, maybe, but little evidence is there to actually warrant it and the devastation it causes is too immense.
The devastation is the whole point.
10% of all Americans will soon be evicted from their homes and rentals
7-day average for positivity for reported cases down to 14.3% from high of 15.7% one week ago
Last 5 days the number of current hospitalizations have been steady after a 4x increase in a 6 week period
Cases have plateaued for last 10 days outside 14-day window (Jul02-Jul11) - short term forecast looks like trend will continue
Deaths continue to follow previous increased cases then hospitalizations trends
Wear a mask
Social distance
Wash your hands
GET TESTED
L'Oncle wrote:
10% of all Americans will soon be evicted from their homes and rentals
no they won't.
troll.
Harambe wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Dude, nice MO. You claim you have proven you are right by posting list of articles where the first one says you are wrong....mostly you just claim you are right. It is a fine strategy to keep claiming you are right and smarter than everyone without showing proof. Yes, there are plenty of people that think lock downs work enough that they are necessary, but like the very first articles states there is no direct evidence they do; most of it is based on modeling studies. Which, is fine and provides some direction, but can easily be very wrong. Your claim is the science is settled and everyone who disagrees is just stupid,, but you don't even know what the science is, you just take a dump and the floor and say "science, see, I am right....I showed you science stuff". The science is definitely not settled on lockdowns, there are camps of scientists on both sides and the data in the middle is minimal and muddy. Please don't ever get into science, or change your approach a bit, or you are going to be leveled at every conference you go to and every time you open your mouth to present anything. In the end ,the point is not that they absolutely don't work, I don't think they work well enough to be worth the cost and there still is no direct evidence that lockdowns are effective enough to be a critical measure governments must put into place; and again, almost every nation where forced stay at home orders put in place observed greater decimation due to the virus. Maybe that is just because the virus hit them hard and other places not; but all of the places getting hit now that did not shut down are not getting hit as hard as the places that did earlier. Closing school again would be a disaster, not only for the kids but for the country; there is definitely no reason to do so other than the politics of idiots, and if you think Ivy League professors are free of idiocy and being political, I know many, you are a total lost cause to the religion of "experts"....2505 awaits you.
If the data in the middle is minimal and muddy, you should be able to post at least a few preprints/articles with actual analysis that supports your claims.
Simply saying "almost every nation where forced stay at home orders put in place observed greater decimation due to the virus," is not evidence. Many of the articles posted clearly are aware of this and attempt to use more sophisticated methods than looking at excel graphs to tease our correlations.
So far you have been presented with a lot of evidence and said "well it's not PROOF," and then lectured people about the scientific community apparently demanding 100% certainty of causation.
You seem smart enough to know that it's going to be impossible to show evidence of causation at this point in time. Clearly we have to work from the best available evidence, and I have seen a mountain of it on one side, and a few sentences of unsourced conjecture from you.
The fact that you've floated the idea that "all professors are in a conspiracy to make lockdowns look good because they don't want to work" (or something like that), suggests that you might be running out of steam here.
Well, Lead Head has finally convinced one person that he is right. Unfortunately, it's L'Oncle (Giles Corey). He's the guy who thinks the whole pandemic is a Jewish conspiracy.
But maybe that counts as progress?
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Um no, I am saying there is not a world wide consensus on anything you are saying despite the fact that you believe that is so.
You need to stop lying about what I said.
First you claim that I said it was "settled science". I never said anything of the sort.
Now you say I'm claiming world wide consensus. I never said that either.
It's one thing to make foolish claims like, "There is no evidence that lockdowns work". But it's quite another to post obvious lies about what I've said.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
You also did not prove any one wrong, there is still no evidence we should be shutting things back down this fall, particularly schools. How about you do some digging on what has happened in nations were schools have already opened back up.....want to know the answer? Nothing. Schools are not the problem and children should not suffer for your politics of claim and yell.
So, you can trust the whiny OCD obsessed 0.01 % of academia or you could trust the rest sitting silent in agreement with the CDC on opening schools.
I've also said nothing to you about schools. Stop lying.
Fat hurts wrote:
Harambe wrote:
If the data in the middle is minimal and muddy, you should be able to post at least a few preprints/articles with actual analysis that supports your claims.
Simply saying "almost every nation where forced stay at home orders put in place observed greater decimation due to the virus," is not evidence. Many of the articles posted clearly are aware of this and attempt to use more sophisticated methods than looking at excel graphs to tease our correlations.
So far you have been presented with a lot of evidence and said "well it's not PROOF," and then lectured people about the scientific community apparently demanding 100% certainty of causation.
You seem smart enough to know that it's going to be impossible to show evidence of causation at this point in time. Clearly we have to work from the best available evidence, and I have seen a mountain of it on one side, and a few sentences of unsourced conjecture from you.
The fact that you've floated the idea that "all professors are in a conspiracy to make lockdowns look good because they don't want to work" (or something like that), suggests that you might be running out of steam here.
Well, Lead Head has finally convinced one person that he is right. Unfortunately, it's L'Oncle (Giles Corey). He's the guy who thinks the whole pandemic is a Jewish conspiracy.
But maybe that counts as progress?
I am sorry you think you not being convinced means only one other person is convinced and that being able to mock somebody else means that you are right. You were never right, and that was the whole point, and your response has always been to mock and provide shifty evidence. Your claim that the only things we know is lock downs work, is not supported by the data, and barely even suggestive by model oriented data manipulations provided by some recent studies, while the basic data relating lock down and eventual deaths, a child could see there is no relationship.