pbphoto

They're experiencing the same case-demic we are. How are deaths and hospitalizations? They had 6 deaths with covid today, sadly, but that doesn't make a second wave.

He's a dope. The data does not support this.

Apparently the math is more complicated than taught in a post-graduate statistical case study class. https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnn-editor-deletes-coronavirus-tweet-after-being-fact-checked-by-alex-berenson

If you have 35 minutes to spare, and it seems like most of you reading this thread do, this is worth your time. He starts out looking at Europe, then the USA, then the current case-demic we are experiencing with PCR testing.

They are substantial but it is too early to point to that excess death chart and make definitive statements. It needs a few more months to play out.

I was away for a few hours and a food fight broke out in the old folks home.😀

But are you assuming that confirmed positive tests equals the percentage of the population that has immunity? Or that the death rate is the same across the entire population?

I've never seen this data before. Where did you find it?

Right, we have 190K deaths with covid, not from covid. However, right now, excess deaths in the country are above 200K (IIRC)in the last CDC report. But I want to see how many excess deaths in the US there will be next Spring when we can look back at the 2020 as a whole.

Again, I'm not convinced - I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I need to more time for the data to come in. And yes, there is a very good reason the entire planet is preoccupied with covi19, but I suspect we will not agree on what it is either.

I'm going to call the guy who predicted 2+ million covid deaths in the US and ask him if I can borrow his.

We'll have to see how the excess deaths in this country end up over the next 6 months or so. I do agree that it is fatal in the vulnerable population at a much too high of a rate. As far as being the deadliest in the last century, I'm not so sure. For the healthy working population, you are right, we don't know the long term effects. Unfortunately, we do know the short term effects of keeping the healthy population locked down all too well, and I predict this will end up being much deadlier than the disease itself.

I agree if you do more testing, you find more cases, and the reverse is also true. We're still doing a large amount of testing that looks like it has tailed off recently, but cases have been declining since mid-July faster than the rate of testing, so I'm optimistic. The hospitalization rate has been declining since mid-July as well. Deaths have been down since early-mid August but still too high for me, and unfortunately, it looks like +75% are still targeted at folks over 65 years old with other complicating factors in the mix. The data indicates we are finding cases in the healthy population as they return to school and work. They may or may not even have known they had it, and if they get sick, they are able to fight it off and not end up in the hospital. A positive test result doesn't mean you are sick. Case positivity rate today has very different ramifications than it did in April and May, when we were largely testing the vulnerable population who showed symptoms.

But the dancer said she wanted to go out with me.

Is testing down? In Illinois, testing is thru the roof as kids go back to school. The friday before labor day, Illinois did almost 150K tests - 4X more than average. I'm not sure why but I suspect every school district in the state that opened this last Tuesday told their kids to send in their test kits last week.

Agreed, although cases in the US peaked in mid-July and deaths in mid-August. Both have been trending down since their peaks. Maybe there's a sturgis-bump in the data someplace but I can't see it. Definitely something to watch.

It looks like cases in SD peaked at 623 on August 27, roughly two weeks after the end of Sturgis, which makes sense. There's been a downward trend in cases the last couple weeks. I agree we'll have to watch the deaths - they've been flat or down thus far. 4 people died today after putting up zeros the last few days. I don't know the demographics of the deaths, or if they are related to Sturgis. But I worry about this event, more so than cases on a college campus for example, because Sturgis attendees are not the healthiest population.

Is there anything in life that isn't more deadly for obese people?

I wasn't at Sturgis but the numbers in this article do no pass the BS test. It's quite a stretch to go from "the event was linked to hundreds of covid cases in 10 states and one death" to "based on our cell phone tracking data and our movement prediction patterns, we estimate that the event caused 250,000 cases and $12.2B in public health costs." It's not until the 2nd to last paragraph that they admit in a round-about way that these numbers are high over-estimates. Seems to me like the authors are stretching data to justify more strict lockdowns.

The "Sanford and Son" theme song popped into my head when I saw this topic.

Agree 100%. If you are under 60 and in good health, get on with your life. Shutting down your life and hiding in fear is much worse for your health.

I'm wondering about this too. I believe the report is saying that 6% of the people died with covid alone. The other 94% died with covid and, on average, 2.6 other things wrong with them but they didn't go back and do a root-cause analysis of the death. Since covid primarily kills elderly folks with heart, lungs or weight issues, it's tough to narrow down. My mom's death certificate says "congestive heart failure" but ignores the fact that she had sepsis, pneumonia, and didn't eat or drink for 7 days in hospice... The coroner has to pick something. The Spanish Flu was unique because it targeted young healthy adults - maybe because a lot of them were conveniently bunched together in trenches on the Western Front. I don't think we'll ever know how deadly it was because the allies didn't want to report the true numbers to the enemy, which is why it is called the Spanish Flu - Spain was neutral. Covid appears to be the opposite - for most young healthy adults under 60, it's a nuisance if they realize they have it at all. The CDC provisional counts show that the flu and pneumonia are deadlier for people under about 30 - if I'm reading the report correctly. And if you are in Chicago and under 18, gunshot wounds are much much deadlier.

Yes, you have it right. I find it confusing too, so I draw myself a picture before connecting everything. Then I quickly forget what I did, but it works! For 2-channel listening: 2-channel source --> pre/ integrated amp --> L+R+sub speakers. For HT: AVR L+R pre-outs --> integrated amp (bypass on) --> L+R speakers AVR center + surround channels --> directly to the speakers AVR sub-out --> if your pre/integrated amp has 2.1 capability (parasound), or directly to the sub using Y-splitter rca cables (to share the sub with 2-channel) You can connect the 12v trigger outputs/inputs so that when you turn on your pre/integrated amp for 2-channel listening, your power amp turns out too. And then when you turn on your AVR to watch a movie, both your pre/integrated and power amp turn on, automatically in bypass mode.

Yes, check out Parasound - or get a 2-channel with two output channels: A for the heresies and B for the sub-out. Here's a list that looks fairly up to date: http://www.audiophile.no/en/articles-tests-reviews/item/426-amplifiers-with-processor-input