Fauci is full of baloney

Explain the charts. Explain the math. Similar restrictions in different locations (actually tighter restrictions in California than NY) having dissimilar results when the environmental conditions for community spread are far worse in New York than California points to one conclusion: herd immunity has been achieved in NYC. Just continue to ignore the evidence.

Harambe wrote:

joedirtt wrote:

Compare the mortality curve in New York (where basically everyone got exposed initially due to the subway and climate):

Attack rate likely <35% for New York city.

"Basically everyone"

'likely"= you have no idea at all

joedirtt wrote:

Explain the charts. Explain the math. Similar restrictions in different locations (actually tighter restrictions in California than NY) having dissimilar results when the environmental conditions for community spread are far worse in New York than California points to one conclusion: herd immunity has been achieved in NYC. Just continue to ignore the evidence.

You are arguing with a religious zealot; there is no point with this unscientific person.

Yes, with a median age of 81, the mean age could still be 42. Obviously it isn’t, but you have a lot of room on the younger side and little room on the older side so the median almost certainly exceeds the mean. In the extreme case I mentioned with 51 percent of mortality occurring in 82 year olds and 49 percent in 42 year olds the mean years of life lost would be quite high. I looked for the U S mean, but didnt find it (odd). If you find it let me know.

Lead Foil Hat wrote:

joedirtt wrote:

Explain the charts. Explain the math. Similar restrictions in different locations (actually tighter restrictions in California than NY) having dissimilar results when the environmental conditions for community spread are far worse in New York than California points to one conclusion: herd immunity has been achieved in NYC. Just continue to ignore the evidence.

You are arguing with a religious zealot; there is no point with this unscientific person.

Lol. I see cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in NYC and greater NY.

No evidence for herd immunity, although they do take the virus more seriously there so you'd expect a slower curve.

the beagle wrote:

"Please don't cite a study" is so 2020.

So true. Unkle only considers Allen53s tweets as legit evidence.

The Unkle wrote:

Irony Mann wrote:

Oh, the irony!

How do you keep coming up with such fresh material?

You continue to be my inspiration.

It is possible that they are approaching herd immunity. If 43 percent is the correct number when dealing with infections as opposed to vaccinations(and immunity is durable). Prorating out the NYC numbers to the US as a whole the approaching herd immunity case gets you between 600000 and 7000000 deaths

Harambe wrote:

Lead Foil Hat wrote:

You are arguing with a religious zealot; there is no point with this unscientific person.

Lol. I see cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in NYC and greater NY.

No evidence for herd immunity, although they do take the virus more seriously there so you'd expect a slower curve.

Again, you are just making up these declarations. No evidence for this. You could say, "I don't think or I do think", and people would think you are more credible, but you don't. You just declare "truth" and mock dissenters. Personally, I think NY is pretty close and that they will not see any more than 10% of what occurred in the spring, if that. Even if herd immunity is reached that does not see we won't see any cases at all. You also have to consider it is flu season and we are not testing for this. If the corona virus is just about everywhere you would expect a good fraction of elderly people dying of the flu to test positive for covid even if a covid infection is not substantial. Overall, you tact is basically what rubs most people the wrong way. You say things with certainty when there is no certainty to be had. Go ahead and express your opinion, but don't declare it fact and then use that to call people stupid; it is a classic ploy of ignorant narcissists, not someone wanting to discuss a scientific problem.

They are not taking it more seriously than anywhere else. My town has had mask mandates since the summer, virtual learning for over a month, in person dining banned, and our case growth has been among the fastest in the nation. Like I said, compare New York City to basically everywhere else that didn't get hit hard initially. It's not even close, and it's not behavior.

660,000 deaths is what I have figured for the upper limit of this, which is still a fraction of something like the Spanish Flu. The only reasons Swine Flu didn't take out more when it came around is a lot of older individuals already had immunity from something similar when they were younger and we had a vaccine sooner because the process for making flu vaccines was more well defined.

I mean he's allowed to be certain when his statement is literally: I see cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in NYC and greater NY. Which any person with a brain can verify in under 30 seconds of work. Choosing to be blind does not give you the right to question others's certainty!

Wait bro... you're joking - right? The best estimate for Spanish Flu deaths in the US is... 675,000. So yes your proposed "upper bound" (for US deaths I assume) is still a fraction but just a very large fraction (98%). I love it when COVID trolls own themselves....https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-commemoration/1918-pandemic-history.htm

joedirtt wrote:

660,000 deaths is what I have figured for the upper limit of this, which is still a fraction of something like the Spanish Flu. The only reasons Swine Flu didn't take out more when it came around is a lot of older individuals already had immunity from something similar when they were younger and we had a vaccine sooner because the process for making flu vaccines was more well defined.

As a proportion of the population it was significantly higher and it also affected younger people. That was a very prominent feature, so proportional years of life lost was much greater

[quote]2600 bro wrote:

I mean he's allowed to be certain when his statement is literally:

I see cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in NYC and greater NY.

Which any person with a brain can verify in under 30 seconds of work.

Choosing to be blind does not give you the right to question others's certainty!

Convenient you left out the part where he claims there is no evidence for herd immunity in NYC. Just because there are cases rising does not mean that could not be occurring. I am still pretty sure you and Harambe are the same person, so....there is that too. I am glad you jumped in to defend yourself.

Anyone has the right to question another's certainty.

A bod like that and you're sitting here thinking that the fella is a bologna eater?

Sure but we don't have to take you seriously

Lead Foil Hat wrote:

Anyone has the right to question another's certainty.

What? climbing cases, hosp, and deaths presents no evidence for herd immunity. I fail to see how such certainty is unjustified. High estimates for NY State total infected is ~35-40% (avg predicted 20%). Obviously that's on the path to herd immunity... any infection is on the path, but to make claims that NY is at herd immunity you have to make some pretty bold claims about the nature of the virus or our detection rates - and that's on you not Harambe.

Lead Foil Hat wrote:

[quote]2600 bro wrote:

I mean he's allowed to be certain when his statement is literally:

I see cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in NYC and greater NY.

Which any person with a brain can verify in under 30 seconds of work.

Choosing to be blind does not give you the right to question others's certainty!

Convenient you left out the part where he claims there is no evidence for herd immunity in NYC. Just because there are cases rising does not mean that could not be occurring. I am still pretty sure you and Harambe are the same person, so....there is that too. I am glad you jumped in to defend yourself.