Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19)

[N is for nowledge]

3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Ummmm....that's because more limitations have been put in place?  It's not a difficult concept here.

See my above point.  What changed from 2.0 to 3.0, nothing.  Why was 3.0 with nothing changed off substantially on the day it was released.  It continues to be incorrect as in not even close., and the variance is growing by the day.

[knapplc]

I'm late to this conversation. @N is for nowledge what is your basic premise here? That we've been doing the right things or the wrong things in response to this disease?

 

[BigRedBuster]

5 minutes ago, N is for nowledge said:

I didn’t say any social limitations, in fact I’ve said the exact opposite citing my own families behavior.  I’ve questioned for how long this is necessary.

Literally everyone is questioning this.  I'm not sure what you think you are arguing against.

 

 

[Mavric]

 

[BigRedBuster]

8 minutes ago, N is for nowledge said:

See my above point.  What changed from 2.0 to 3.0, nothing.  Why was 3.0 with nothing changed off substantially on the day it was released.  It continues to be incorrect as in not even close., and the variance is growing by the day.

Can you provide a link to all the assumptions in each of the projections?

 

And, are you talking about the IMHE or IHME?

[N is for nowledge]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

Literally everyone is questioning this.  I'm not sure what you think you are arguing against.

 

 

The idea that a model that has been proven to be anything but accurate is leading our public policy response to this.  Ppl may be questioning it but the government continues to push out restrictions and institute health institutions to reduce outpatient and elective surgeries to prep for something that is obvupious won’t be coming.

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, N is for nowledge said:

The idea that a model that has been proven to be anything but accurate is leading our public policy response to this.  Ppl may be questioning it but the government continues to push out restrictions and institute health institutions to reduce outpatient and elective surgeries to prep for something that is obvupious won’t be coming.

So....you know more than just about every infectious disease expert in the world just be looking at a graph.

[N is for nowledge]

4 minutes ago, knapplc said:

I'm late to this conversation. @N is for nowledge what is your basic premise here? That we've been doing the right things or the wrong things in response to this disease?

 

Essentially the model we have been using to model public policy is hot garbage.  Based on bad data set from the beginning, 1.0, 2.0, and yes 3.0 are not anywhere close to accurate.  The fear of this thing is worse than the reality, again, fatality rate of .4-.7%, and those are with several ore existing conditions.   Early on I think we made the right decision to social distance but the end of april signifies a time to ease restrictions.  Some have been arguing the model is accurate, I don’t know how, maybe 2+2=5.  And that outside of a vaccine stuck in our houses is where you will find us.  This started about football in august, some people said we’d still be in our houses sans a vaccine.  After April the cure is worse than the virus.

[BigRedBuster]

2 hours ago, N is for nowledge said:

Yep totally legit.  Nothing to see here, just accurate “models” proven inaccurate by the day and by the hour.  Btw, all the models built in social distancing measures taken since early to mid March.

What is the source of this graph?

[N is for nowledge]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

So....you know more than just about every infectious disease expert in the world just be looking at a graph.

One numbers are numbers, you don’t need or have an md to review these and engage in critical thinking.  I’m sorry you feel that way but I don’t by into the god complex of someone we call dr.  
 

btw,  it every infectious disease doctor feels this way, but I like the groupthink idea.

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

What is the source of this graph?

Literally sourced at the bottom.  

[knapplc]

2 minutes ago, N is for nowledge said:

Essentially the model we have been using to model public policy is hot garbage.  Based on bad data set from the beginning, 1.0, 2.0, and yes 3.0 are not anywhere close to accurate.  The fear of this thing is worse than the reality, again, fatality rate of .4-.7%, and those are with several ore existing conditions.   Early on I think we made the right decision to social distance but the end of april signifies a time to ease restrictions.  Some have been arguing the model is accurate, I don’t know how, maybe 2+2=5.  And that outside of a vaccine stuck in our houses is where you will find us.  This started about football in august, some people said we’d still be in our houses sans a vaccine.  After April the cure is worse than the virus.

 

Where should we have gotten better information from?

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, N is for nowledge said:

Literally sourced at the bottom.  

No, literally who put the graph together and published it?  Who tweeted it?

[N is for nowledge]

Just now, knapplc said:

 

Where should we have gotten better information from?

I’m saying is it rational to use Italy, and NYC as the starting data set to rollout as a model across the entire USA.  Is NYC kind of unique in someways.  Is NYC anything like Omaha, Lincoln, or Valantine NE for that matter.  
 

im saying it could have been used but was the main trigger presented to potus to close US through April.  It’s now been proven pretty overstated, through 2.0 and into 3.0.  Yet we are still using it to gauge or response on a federal and local level.  Should there not be a better way, a better analysis.

[BigRedBuster]

@N is for nowledge who is IMHE?

[N is for nowledge]

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

No, literally who put the graph together and published it?  Who tweeted it?

Why does that matter, the citation is in the friggin graph.  Again numbers are numbers.  I’m sorry they don’t say what you want them to say.