I understand that there are complicated math models used by the epidemiologists that have been the basis for the decisions.
So I don’t think the step in question is ignored or non existent. But those models aren’t something with much certainty. The models also don’t relate to my individual grocery trip. The model is about a large population going about its normal activity day to day as a whole. The models predicts a range of potential results based on general actions.
They originally looked at the models. Saw that doing nothing could result in 200k-2M dead Americans and that social distancing would cut that to 35k-140k.* So they chose to do social distancing.
Those are the #'s.*
What #'s are you looking for ?
*edit : not sure if those are the right numbers but thats the idea and those are #'s I’ve found
Much like you said above, what’s the baseline risk of being infected just going about your day. Is a sick person going about his day for a week going to infect 3 people, or 30 people?
We hear all about potential exposure, but what is the rate those potential exposures convert to actual infections? If a sick person coughs towards a railing, and I later touch the railing then pick my nose, what’s the chances of me becoming infected by that potential exposure?
I know the exact number is unknown, but so far it’s been made out to be a near certainty. But that’d mean that a single infected person taking the subway to and from work for a week would’ve infected thousands. There’s no way that is correct, or else most of what we fear happening has in fact already happened. For all these experts giving commentary on all these theoretical risks, cant we get one ballpark guess on the practical application? Sure, doing “X” reduces risk by half - but is that half of 100%, or half of .1%?
Yes. Trump. “LIBERATE (insert state name with democrat governor in office)!!!”
Yes, all of the above. Fox. Trump. Pence. The Karen MAGA anti-vaxxers protesting at state capitals for the right to violate the law and infect more people than necessary.
Yes, all facts evidenced by direct live televised public speech and electronic evidence (the tweets from tweeter-in- chief you asked about) are FAKE NEWS.
Why are people asking questions in a negative manner?? Only a joke of a reporter would ask serious questions. They should be congratulating what great jobs have been done in initial response that disallowed a containment and instead necessitated a near shutdown of the country to prevent a massive pileup of bodies in the streets. A free press shouldn’t be asking any questions of which the answers won’t reflect favorably on the politician being asked them. Tune in for these and more Alternative Facts® at the daily government funded campaign propaganda session.
NO! WE MUST HEAVILY SUBSIDIZE THE OIL INDUSTRY! WE CAN’T HAVE A SHIFT TO CLEAN POWER WITH ALL THE BEAUTIFUL FRACKING OPERATIONS GOING OUT OF BUSINESS.
We must also end any legislation favorableneutral to local clean power industries. We don’t want to be able to compete with chyna, they should have a competitive advantage over local hippies.
I wish. But I would’ve put the % signs in the right place .
I hope it’s clear that my comments are not about the picture (which is as far from ‘official’ as you can get), but the underlying principles (which is something numerous experts and media routinely bring up).
Yes. But he’ll have to pay for someone to pick it up (wherever delivery has to be accepted at) and to transport it. The logistics would probably be excessively pricey for arranging and moving just 500 gal cross country.
Edit: Plus i have no idea what the minimum contract amount is – it might be much more than 500 gal.
Los Angeles estimating 4% if their population has had the virus based on anitbody test sampling, 40x more than the confirmed tested cases. Could be sampling biases but still.
Presumably this expunges the conspiracy theories that almost everyone has already had it, so “herd immunity” is the way to go with no attempt to control. Reasonable people will want to avoid preventable deaths in the 1-2 magnitude higher numbers. Not to mention economic/productivity/medical costs/long term health costs from all the much younger survivors who would eventually recover but would have weeks to upwards of a month of a serious respiratory infection to deal with and those who would also have long term lung damage.
But then again, evidence from antibody test monitoring probably wouldn’t convince any of those people.
The only conspiracy theory is your claim that this is what people have been wanting.
Reasonable people want to avoid preventable deaths by doing what’s necessary to prevent them - not throw everything but the kitchen sink at the problem then insist it’s all essential to producing those results.
??? You omitted the conspiracy theory I referred to. Specifically that “almost everyone has already caught it”. Nowhere near a majority of the population has.
I didn’t say that’s the only possible disagreement on mitigation efforts.
Fair enough, there’s always a couple wackos pimping extreme ideas. But for the most part, it isnt that every has already had it, it’s that we dont know how many have. And saying we dont know what we dont know is never a theory of conspiracy.
Throwing “everything but the kitchen sink” would have been a military-style lockdown for 70+ days, like in Wuhan. The US threw sticks and stones compared to that. Reasonable people think that what we’d done was necessary to prevent avoidable deaths. I’m using your own argument against you, see. Cause you’re basically arguing that what was done was not reasonable, even though we don’t know what we don’t know, and those who know anything about these things decided that this was reasonable.
Remember, we could have avoided a lot of the economic damage by having a plan, having enough test kits, having enough masks. AKA, South Korea, or Taiwan style response. The worst part is that we have a lot more warning than the places I mentioned.
.