Trump tests positive for coronavirus. Discuss.

*ahem* wrote:

Joe Jackson wrote:

At 74, you have a ~97% chance for just living another year. Not sure I’d call that a ‘very high probability’ of living to 84.

WTF you talkin' 'bout, Willis? The average American male who reaches his 74th birthday can look for nearly 12 more years; the femaie, 13 1/2 more years. Did you mean the average male has a 97% of living *at least* another year? That would seem reasonable.

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

Yes, that’s what the table says and that is what I meant. However, we seem to disagree about how grim of an outlook it is having a 3% chance of dying within a year. I don’t like those odds. Way worse than a 10 year old’s odds.

Crime family.

Joe Jackson wrote:

*ahem* wrote:

WTF you talkin' 'bout, Willis? The average American male who reaches his 74th birthday can look for nearly 12 more years; the femaie, 13 1/2 more years. Did you mean the average male has a 97% of living *at least* another year? That would seem reasonable.

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

Yes, that’s what the table says and that is what I meant. However, we seem to disagree about how grim of an outlook it is having a 3% chance of dying within a year. I don’t like those odds. Way worse than a 10 year old’s odds.

uhhh....the average American that reaches 74 lives to almost 87 , but you don't think they have a high probability of reaching 84?

just admit you didn't know what you were talking. save some dignity

After seeing that video I imagine he checked out on his own since no doctor would approve of him leaving in that state.

I wonder if the doctors can be blamed for negligence if he drops dead in three day for letting him do what he wishes.

it's ovah wrote:

Joe Jackson wrote:

Yes, that’s what the table says and that is what I meant. However, we seem to disagree about how grim of an outlook it is having a 3% chance of dying within a year. I don’t like those odds. Way worse than a 10 year old’s odds.

uhhh....the average American that reaches 74 lives to almost 87 , but you don't think they have a high probability of reaching 84?

just admit you didn't know what you were talking. save some dignity

A ‘very high probability’....absolutely not. 3% chance of not making it past 74. 8% chance of not making it past 83. Not good odds at all.

I would say a 74 year old has a ~60% chance of living to 84. You know, like a slightly better than average chance. I wouldn’t put any money on it.

Joe Jackson wrote:

it's ovah wrote:

uhhh....the average American that reaches 74 lives to almost 87 , but you don't think they have a high probability of reaching 84?

just admit you didn't know what you were talking. save some dignity

A ‘very high probability’....absolutely not. 3% chance of not making it past 74. 8% chance of not making it past 83. Not good odds at all.

I would say a 74 year old has a ~60% chance of living to 84. You know, like a slightly better than average chance. I wouldn’t put any money on it.

ok....so you're either too proud to admit you were mistaken, intellectually dishonest, or just full-blown stupid.

those will cease being traits to be proud of shortly.....

it's ovah wrote:

Joe Jackson wrote:

A ‘very high probability’....absolutely not. 3% chance of not making it past 74. 8% chance of not making it past 83. Not good odds at all.

I would say a 74 year old has a ~60% chance of living to 84. You know, like a slightly better than average chance. I wouldn’t put any money on it.

ok....so you're either too proud to admit you were mistaken, intellectually dishonest, or just full-blown stupid.

those will cease being traits to be proud of shortly.....

Perhaps my original statement was worded poorly. I was trying to put emphasis on the 3% chance of a 74 year old dying that year (a not-insignificant chance in my opinion and that’s just the first of 10 years). I’m not writing a book so I haven’t had several others proofread my posts first. It made sense to me.

3% chance of dying at 74. 97% chance of making it another full year to 75. At that point (age 75), they may live longer but the chances get worse.

Is something wrong with that statement?

You 1) jumped into a debate where people had been claiming that because the US life expectancy is 74 then someone dying at 74 is no lost life years. 2) claimed that a ~50% to make it to 87(!!!) was "not significant" in this context. Yeah bro, you look pretty stupid.

Joe Jackson wrote:

Perhaps my original statement was worded poorly. I was trying to put emphasis on the 3% chance of a 74 year old dying that year (a not-insignificant chance in my opinion and that’s just the first of 10 years). I’m not writing a book so I haven’t had several others proofread my posts first. It made sense to me.

3% chance of dying at 74. 97% chance of making it another full year to 75. At that point (age 75), they may live longer but the chances get worse.

Is something wrong with that statement?

2600 bro wrote:

You

1) jumped into a debate where people had been claiming that because the US life expectancy is 74 then someone dying at 74 is no lost life years.

2) claimed that a ~50% to make it to 87(!!!) was "not significant" in this context.

Yeah bro, you look pretty stupid.

Joe Jackson wrote:

Perhaps my original statement was worded poorly. I was trying to put emphasis on the 3% chance of a 74 year old dying that year (a not-insignificant chance in my opinion and that’s just the first of 10 years). I’m not writing a book so I haven’t had several others proofread my posts first. It made sense to me.

3% chance of dying at 74. 97% chance of making it another full year to 75. At that point (age 75), they may live longer but the chances get worse.

Is something wrong with that statement?

Quit changing my words.

If literally everyone except you doesn't pick up on the enlightened-read-between-the-lines-nuance of your genius arguments... maybe it's on you?

Joe Jackson wrote:

Quit changing my words.

Joe Jackson wrote:

Perhaps my original statement was worded poorly. I was trying to put emphasis on the 3% chance of a 74 year old dying that year (a not-insignificant chance in my opinion and that’s just the first of 10 years). I’m not writing a book so I haven’t had several others proofread my posts first. It made sense to me.

3% chance of dying at 74. 97% chance of making it another full year to 75. At that point (age 75), they may live longer but the chances get worse.

Is something wrong with that statement?

As long as it makes sense to you....that's what counts.

The original statement (not by you) that we were responding to was clearly implying that people dying of Covid at 74 was no big deal because most people are only expected to live till 74 so they weren't really losing much lifetime by dying of Covid.

obviously, that premise has been shredded.

The Unkle wrote:

Harambe wrote:

It's a meme you illiterate boomer

Yes.

Too cowardly.

Just keep saying it's a meme. It makes you appear quite intelligent

Google: "search engine"

We are all mortal folks. Do you really want to live your life in a mask? Seems an odd destiny to choose.

Noyankee wrote:

We are all mortal folks. Do you really want to live your life in a mask? Seems an odd destiny to choose.

This line feels like it was taken from a Monty Python or Mel Brooks film. Quite funny at so many levels. You honestly made me chuckle.

Ha, It’s early. All in good fun

Joe Jackson wrote:

[quote]it's ovah wrote:

[quote]Joe Jackson wrote:

[quote]*ahem* wrote:

[quote]Joe Jackson wrote:

I would say a 74 year old has a ~60% chance of living to 84. You know, like a slightly better than average chance. I wouldn’t put any money on it.

You would not take an even money bet on a proposition you had a 60% chance of winning?

Want to explain that one?

L L wrote:

There are so many scenarios.

He has the positive result but never gets sick. People might get the message that it's not a big deal.

He gets very sick. Could that actually help people get the message that it is serious?

...

I don't think he will go on camera if he's sick, except for a minute at a time while he composes himself.

This is from my first post of this thread.

He seems to have fallen between these two scenarios at this point.

They said he got sick. And he is making it appear that he is bouncing back quickly.

He is not trying at all to make the message that Covid is a serious sickness.

And he is trying to compose himself to make a good appearance on camera.

Harambe wrote:

The Unkle wrote:

Yes.

Too cowardly.

Just keep saying it's a meme. It makes you appear quite intelligent

Google: "search engine"

Come on.

What group did Marx come from? Who is likely to be a liberal homosexual lawyer at the ACLU?

No pills buddy?

L L wrote:

MeHereYouWhere?! wrote:

My biggest fear is that he won't show any symptoms (or will lie to us and said he didn't) and then he'll come out and say "No big deal. I had it. No symptoms. Not a big deal at all.. Nothing to worry about. It's nothing"

There is also a possibility that he is flat out lying that he has tested positive.

Then he would walk around saying that he didn't get sick at all and people should all go back to work and school.

Only a real habitual liar would do something like that but ...

Just throwing that scenario out there.

I believe he may have lied about taking hydroxychloroquine to ease people's fears there wasn't a good treatment.

It didn't make sense that he would take that considering the risks of side effects.

Well, he's saying it's no big deal and nothing to worry about.

And there is some shadiness to his condition and treatment and still a possibility that it's all a show.

Because of his grand propensity to lie, the public doesn't trust anything coming form him or those directed from him. Even the main doctor couldn't talk with a straight face.