Coronavirus Numbers
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
Meanwhile in Italian Parliament...[YouTube]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bUCWcft6kao[/YouTube]
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
I know what that guy's going to die from...an aneurism.Jimmyh787 wrote: ↑Thu May 07, 2020 11:32 am Meanwhile in Italian Parliament...[YouTube]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bUCWcft6kao[/YouTube]
WHAT!!!!!
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
Would have saved a lot of lives. At least we will be getting herd immunity.
Maybe they'll listen to my plan to save the economy over the long run...we'll see.
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
Honestly I can’t tell if you’re an act or you really are that nuts. If it’s an act though...bravo
, you are utterly convincing.-
mixturerich
- Rank 5
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 7:04 pm
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
You’re really swimming against the current.
-
mixturerich
- Rank 5
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 7:04 pm
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
People shit on the media but a lot of it is standard, legitimate reporting, this person said this, this expert said that, here are quotes, statistics, etc, Not every media article is an opinion piece.
-
RippleRock
- Rank 7
- Posts: 637
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:15 pm
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
I don’t care how people feel about the man, but he is undeniably brilliant. Take note:
Conrad Black: Fear of COVID-19 is overblown, it's time to get the economy moving again
The danger of death for 80 per cent of people is not statistically significant, and there is no excuse for continuing any substantial part of the lockdown in respect of them.
Conrad Black
May 8, 2020
4:13 PM EDT
It is possible to become demoralized by the enthusiasm an inordinate number of Canadians seem to have to continue the coronavirus shutdown. The generally capable mayor of Toronto, my friend of many years, John Tory, who’s usually a sensible man, is now being lampooned even by soft-left elements of the media for trying to prevent the public from crowding into High Park and other public places to enjoy the sight and aroma of the cherry blossoms, a much anticipated rite of spring. This is starting to resemble the Dutch Tulip madness of the 17th century, where individual tulip flowering plants, which had only recently been developed, could sell for the current equivalent of over $50,000, and we are discussing the frugal and sober Dutch, not a nationality more accustomed to taking leave of its collective senses.
Canada recorded 4,404 coronavirus deaths as of Thursday night; about 80 per cent of them are among the 20 per cent of people over the age of 60, and usually with additional health problems that have compromised their immune systems. Thus, we have discovered with the data that has come in in the last two months, and especially from the over eight million tests in the United States, that we have a significant problem for a fifth of the people and a minimal problem for the great majority. In Canada this means that among people over 65 there has been about one fatality for each 2,200 people, or one-22nd of one per cent, which are pretty good odds for the elderly. And as 20 per cent of fatalities occur among the 80 per cent of the population beneath the age of 65, the chances of people in that large age bracket being mortally afflicted from this pandemic are approximately one in almost 40,000. Thus the danger of death for 80 per cent of people is not statistically significant, and there is no excuse for continuing any substantial part of the lockdown in respect of them.
American testing, uncontradicted by the experiences of other countries that have tested extensively, is that about half of those who contract the coronavirus have no symptoms at all, so the fear that people who survive a coronavirus attack are certain to have been through a terrible, life-threatening ordeal is unfounded. And thorough research in New York City, where there has been the greatest concentration of occurrences of the illness in North America, well beyond that city’s proportionate share of the U.S. population, reveals that two-thirds of infections have been contracted by people who have been observing the shutdown and staying at home. I supported the shutdown as necessary to ensure that a disease that we had reason to fear was deadlier and more pernicious than it is did not sweep across the whole population. But now, nothing could be more obvious than the fact that it is a positive danger now, medically and economically, to continue the shutdown remotely as tightly as it has been.
The confinement of millions of people doesn’t, beyond a certain point, reduce the chances of infection and this level of economic disruption is an unprecedented international act of self-impoverishment. The human damage of this amount of artificial unemployment cannot be sustained much longer, and neither can the fiscal burden of trying to compensate those who have been disemployed as a result of public policy rather than any fault of their own or the normal forces of the free market, and there is no excuse for it. I am not a gun enthusiast and don’t enjoy shooting of any kind but it was hard not to be impressed by the determination of large groups of Americans crowding into state capitals last week, many of them exercising the Second Amendment right to bear arms, to assert their right to go freely about their communities, do their jobs, earn their pay and take care of their families. When my sons and daughter and I were all much younger, I used to take them to paintball parks in the interior of Florida and was always astounded at how many adult men appeared in battle fatigues and told me what arsenals they had in their homes of real guns and how little surprised they would be if at some point they had to defend their homes against the government, as in the days of the American Revolution.
The gentler tradition of this country has many attractions, and there are aspects of American society that are mad and violent. But the docility of Canadians putting up with this nonsense is dispiriting. Escalated efforts should be made to provide for and insulate the vulnerable, who are almost all sensible and aware of the dangers and can act prudently. The rest of the population should take their chances. They have virtually no chance of a fatal encounter and little likelihood of a nasty illness. Our society must act sensibly to reduce the likelihood of dangerous infections but stop this contemptible cowering like moles and imagining that fear of the illness will ever be a policy that banishes it. This is not a question of monetizing life and exalting commerce. It is the recognition that too many in this country seem reluctant to face: that we cannot justify the penury of a fifth of the population, almost eight million people, and dangerous increases in public debt and the money supply, to reduce marginally the mortal impact of a disease that takes such a small percentage of the population.
We know from Sweden what happens when the population is adequately warned and restaurants and theatres and sporting events are somewhat thinned but essentially everything goes on close to normal: the fatality rate rises to about 2.5 times the rate of Canada and perhaps 20 per cent above the United States, and 90 per cent of Sweden’s deaths from this virus occur in people 70 years old or above. Every death is a sadness and premature and avoidable deaths are tragedies, but putting between a fifth and a third of the population in grave financial danger and at risk of ancillary conditions that can also be deadly, to reduce the mortal incidence of the virus from 320 people in one million over the whole population to 200, is not a justifiable measure.
The whole anti-coronavirus effort has suffered from mission creep: at the outset, it was designed to prevent a devastation that would re-enact the great London plague of the mid-17th century. The Imperial College in London predicted, a bit cavalierly, about 2.2 million dead in the United States, about two-thirds of one per cent of the entire population. The shutdown and simultaneous measures reduced the incidence of the coronavirus, but a virus can remain dormant for a long time and cannot be extirpated without a vaccine. Until a vaccine is developed, the best that can be done is to run as normal an economic life as possible, shelter the vulnerable elderly and infirm, and rely on the prudent majority to act wisely but not obsessively or in a cowardly manner. Having neighbours set the police on neighbours because they suspect they are entertaining a friend for dinner, barricading the public out of parks because too many will want to see the cherry blossoms, frog-marching people off beaches and fining or jailing them, demeans the police and insults everyone. It is shaming and absurd.
Telling 25-year-old couples, married or not, straight or gay, who are intimate, that they have to maintain two-metres between them in public is ludicrous. A sure sign that this has gone far enough occurred this week when my tailor in Savile Row advised that designer masks are available. The rest of the world is going back to work and to comparative normalcy, in stages, but much more quickly than we are. No one wants impetuosity; but we don’t want, and should not accept, priggish fearfulness either.
National Post
cmbletters@gmail.com
Conrad Black: Fear of COVID-19 is overblown, it's time to get the economy moving again
The danger of death for 80 per cent of people is not statistically significant, and there is no excuse for continuing any substantial part of the lockdown in respect of them.
Conrad Black
May 8, 2020
4:13 PM EDT
It is possible to become demoralized by the enthusiasm an inordinate number of Canadians seem to have to continue the coronavirus shutdown. The generally capable mayor of Toronto, my friend of many years, John Tory, who’s usually a sensible man, is now being lampooned even by soft-left elements of the media for trying to prevent the public from crowding into High Park and other public places to enjoy the sight and aroma of the cherry blossoms, a much anticipated rite of spring. This is starting to resemble the Dutch Tulip madness of the 17th century, where individual tulip flowering plants, which had only recently been developed, could sell for the current equivalent of over $50,000, and we are discussing the frugal and sober Dutch, not a nationality more accustomed to taking leave of its collective senses.
Canada recorded 4,404 coronavirus deaths as of Thursday night; about 80 per cent of them are among the 20 per cent of people over the age of 60, and usually with additional health problems that have compromised their immune systems. Thus, we have discovered with the data that has come in in the last two months, and especially from the over eight million tests in the United States, that we have a significant problem for a fifth of the people and a minimal problem for the great majority. In Canada this means that among people over 65 there has been about one fatality for each 2,200 people, or one-22nd of one per cent, which are pretty good odds for the elderly. And as 20 per cent of fatalities occur among the 80 per cent of the population beneath the age of 65, the chances of people in that large age bracket being mortally afflicted from this pandemic are approximately one in almost 40,000. Thus the danger of death for 80 per cent of people is not statistically significant, and there is no excuse for continuing any substantial part of the lockdown in respect of them.
American testing, uncontradicted by the experiences of other countries that have tested extensively, is that about half of those who contract the coronavirus have no symptoms at all, so the fear that people who survive a coronavirus attack are certain to have been through a terrible, life-threatening ordeal is unfounded. And thorough research in New York City, where there has been the greatest concentration of occurrences of the illness in North America, well beyond that city’s proportionate share of the U.S. population, reveals that two-thirds of infections have been contracted by people who have been observing the shutdown and staying at home. I supported the shutdown as necessary to ensure that a disease that we had reason to fear was deadlier and more pernicious than it is did not sweep across the whole population. But now, nothing could be more obvious than the fact that it is a positive danger now, medically and economically, to continue the shutdown remotely as tightly as it has been.
The confinement of millions of people doesn’t, beyond a certain point, reduce the chances of infection and this level of economic disruption is an unprecedented international act of self-impoverishment. The human damage of this amount of artificial unemployment cannot be sustained much longer, and neither can the fiscal burden of trying to compensate those who have been disemployed as a result of public policy rather than any fault of their own or the normal forces of the free market, and there is no excuse for it. I am not a gun enthusiast and don’t enjoy shooting of any kind but it was hard not to be impressed by the determination of large groups of Americans crowding into state capitals last week, many of them exercising the Second Amendment right to bear arms, to assert their right to go freely about their communities, do their jobs, earn their pay and take care of their families. When my sons and daughter and I were all much younger, I used to take them to paintball parks in the interior of Florida and was always astounded at how many adult men appeared in battle fatigues and told me what arsenals they had in their homes of real guns and how little surprised they would be if at some point they had to defend their homes against the government, as in the days of the American Revolution.
The gentler tradition of this country has many attractions, and there are aspects of American society that are mad and violent. But the docility of Canadians putting up with this nonsense is dispiriting. Escalated efforts should be made to provide for and insulate the vulnerable, who are almost all sensible and aware of the dangers and can act prudently. The rest of the population should take their chances. They have virtually no chance of a fatal encounter and little likelihood of a nasty illness. Our society must act sensibly to reduce the likelihood of dangerous infections but stop this contemptible cowering like moles and imagining that fear of the illness will ever be a policy that banishes it. This is not a question of monetizing life and exalting commerce. It is the recognition that too many in this country seem reluctant to face: that we cannot justify the penury of a fifth of the population, almost eight million people, and dangerous increases in public debt and the money supply, to reduce marginally the mortal impact of a disease that takes such a small percentage of the population.
We know from Sweden what happens when the population is adequately warned and restaurants and theatres and sporting events are somewhat thinned but essentially everything goes on close to normal: the fatality rate rises to about 2.5 times the rate of Canada and perhaps 20 per cent above the United States, and 90 per cent of Sweden’s deaths from this virus occur in people 70 years old or above. Every death is a sadness and premature and avoidable deaths are tragedies, but putting between a fifth and a third of the population in grave financial danger and at risk of ancillary conditions that can also be deadly, to reduce the mortal incidence of the virus from 320 people in one million over the whole population to 200, is not a justifiable measure.
The whole anti-coronavirus effort has suffered from mission creep: at the outset, it was designed to prevent a devastation that would re-enact the great London plague of the mid-17th century. The Imperial College in London predicted, a bit cavalierly, about 2.2 million dead in the United States, about two-thirds of one per cent of the entire population. The shutdown and simultaneous measures reduced the incidence of the coronavirus, but a virus can remain dormant for a long time and cannot be extirpated without a vaccine. Until a vaccine is developed, the best that can be done is to run as normal an economic life as possible, shelter the vulnerable elderly and infirm, and rely on the prudent majority to act wisely but not obsessively or in a cowardly manner. Having neighbours set the police on neighbours because they suspect they are entertaining a friend for dinner, barricading the public out of parks because too many will want to see the cherry blossoms, frog-marching people off beaches and fining or jailing them, demeans the police and insults everyone. It is shaming and absurd.
Telling 25-year-old couples, married or not, straight or gay, who are intimate, that they have to maintain two-metres between them in public is ludicrous. A sure sign that this has gone far enough occurred this week when my tailor in Savile Row advised that designer masks are available. The rest of the world is going back to work and to comparative normalcy, in stages, but much more quickly than we are. No one wants impetuosity; but we don’t want, and should not accept, priggish fearfulness either.
National Post
cmbletters@gmail.com
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
And for Rockie's consumption only.....So Am I.RippleRock wrote: ↑Fri May 08, 2020 3:13 pm I don’t care how people feel about the man, but he is undeniably brilliant. Take note:
Release and Protect. Not fully as I suggest(get all the non-vulnerable people out an infected) but better than the huddle and destroy the economy crowd.
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/e ... spartandhp
The second approach might be called “release-and-protect” approach, but it comes at a price: an inevitable increase of COVID-19 cases and casualties, and continuing stress on the hospital system. Intense resources would be needed to minimize infections and deaths through stepped-up precautions, to avoid overwhelming the medical system, and to protect the most vulnerable sectors of the population, who would still need to live with some form of distancing until the arrival of vaccines. So what would this approach entail?
Long before implementation of “release-and-protect,” weekly counts of new cases and new deaths should have at least reached a plateau (which they have), and preferably have started to decline (which they haven’t). Hospital facilities, ICU beds, equipment and all human resources should be considerably below capacity and with reserves. Sufficient quantities of virus-testing kits, reagents and the personnel and facilities to run them, must be already in place, as well as certified antibody test kits with acceptably high sensitivity and specificity (minimizing false positives and false negatives).
A planned, phased process is needed, in which people in defined sectors would be allowed back to work, subject to increased precautions, and increased testing, monitoring, screening, and epidemiological surveillance. Categorization of people on the basis of risk would be essential. For instance, those found to be virus-positive, symptomatic or not, would be placed in monitored isolation either at home, or in a government-run centre (e.g. hotel) for that purpose. They would be paid “isolation wages,” meals included, until they are virus-free. People who had effective antibodies, and were therefore immune, would be very valuable and could move and work anywhere without restriction. However, those in the high-risk group—those 65 years old, with type-2 diabetes, pulmonary diseases, cardiovascular diseases, obesity, hypertension, immune-suppressed—will still have to be protected against the virus until vaccines are available, or until herd immunity is reached.
So why is a second wave inevitable?
It’s essential to understand that a second wave of infections and deaths, however small, is unavoidable because the vast majority of the population are still susceptible, and the virus is still circulating undetectable in apparently healthy citizens. Numerous reports confirm more than half of virus-positive people are asymptomatic at the time of testing. Combine that with the realization that for this disease, the serial time—the time from your infection until the time you infect someone else—is less than the incubation period.
That’s why for a release-and-protect strategy to have even a chance of working, testing has to be ramped up enormously. Staff in high-risk institutions or occupations—long-term care homes, hospitals, bus drivers, taxi drivers, personal service workers, hairdressers, flight attendants, dentists, and so on—would need to be tested each week as a condition of continued contact with clients or customers, in order to prevent onward transmission.
Workplaces would have to be assessed and assisted in provision of appropriate precautions—plexiglass, masks, hand-disinfectants, maximum numbers in a space, distance/separation, etc., and enforced. Provision of such facilities would be the responsibility of the employers, and considered part of the cost of resuming business. Success of this approach would require due diligence and engagement of all individuals involved. And the risk assessment needs to be comprehensive, integrating considerations about washrooms, lunch rooms, transportation to work, and surfaces sanitization.
Let’s be honest: this is making the best of a bad situation. If carried out effectively, with buy-in and compliance at all levels, and enforcement if they don’t, a release-and-protect approach allows society one chance to slowly get back to work and build herd immunity at a sensible rate while we wait for vaccines. But cases and deaths must be minimized, hospital facilities must be preserved, and those most at risk must be protected.
Thanks, looks like Conrad Black agrees with me. Good thing he was pardoned.
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
You mean the same guy filmed by his own security cameras removing evidence against him out the back door of his office? The guy who went to prison for stealing?RippleRock wrote: ↑Fri May 08, 2020 3:13 pm I don’t care how people feel about the man, but he is undeniably brilliant.
This guy who's impressed by a bunch of moronic goons strutting around with guns?RippleRock wrote: ↑Fri May 08, 2020 3:13 pm I am not a gun enthusiast and don’t enjoy shooting of any kind but it was hard not to be impressed by the determination of large groups of Americans crowding into state capitals last week, many of them exercising the Second Amendment right to bear arms, to assert their right to go freely about their communities, do their jobs, earn their pay and take care of their families.
This common, humble man of the people? The guy who thought Trump was an excellent president even before Trump pardoned him? Think about that for a second...Trump pardoned him. How's that for a character reference?RippleRock wrote: ↑Fri May 08, 2020 3:13 pm A sure sign that this has gone far enough occurred this week when my tailor in Savile Row advised that designer masks are available.
Yup. Brilliant.
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
I hold my nose whenever I read “Lord” Black ... A convicted felon who along with his big brother felt himself entitled to $56M from Dominion Stores employees’ pension fund. He denounced Canadian citizenship (which he fully expects to get back once the great unwashed forget about his BS) for the vanity of being able to call himself “The Right Honourable The Lord Black of Crossharbour”.
Brilliant?? Just like his great pal D.J. Trump is brilliant I suppose. Just another f’n con man.
Try this instead - https://munkdebates.com/dialogues/niall-ferguson
Brilliant?? Just like his great pal D.J. Trump is brilliant I suppose. Just another f’n con man.
Try this instead - https://munkdebates.com/dialogues/niall-ferguson
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
I will take no side in this debate, here on the forum.
But ideas stand or fall on their own merit. Even if the person who espouses them is detestable to some. Attacking the speaker as a degenerate does not lessen their argument or stance. The argument must be countered head on. Not dismissed because of past deeds.
But ideas stand or fall on their own merit. Even if the person who espouses them is detestable to some. Attacking the speaker as a degenerate does not lessen their argument or stance. The argument must be countered head on. Not dismissed because of past deeds.
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
So exactly correct. Sadly, people from Rockie's side of the spectrum are so shallow, that they don't even discuss the merits of the argument, only separate stuff, which shows that they lost the argument long ago.
By the way....as we just discovered with Flynn, we see exactly what Black was writing about when it comes to the FBI in certain areas. They create a crime of obstruction of justice by tricking you into a lie. Some FBI folks might be getting very worried now that the truth is coming out.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker- ... -destroyed
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
Ok, the argument. Where in Lord Pompous Prick’s solution does he reference public health and medical authorities recommendations on how to safely re-open society? Like Trump he considers himself another stable genius who knows more about everything than everybody.
Nobody falls for it except the Ripplerocks and Pelmets of the world. For every two-bit conman there are bigger suckers.
Nobody falls for it except the Ripplerocks and Pelmets of the world. For every two-bit conman there are bigger suckers.
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
Pelmet did you actually read that article? If so you certainly didn’t understand it.
-
RippleRock
- Rank 7
- Posts: 637
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:15 pm
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
I didn’t doubt your position on this for one second. Most intelligent individuals can see the logic in his words that continue to elude some, but not all. Continue to cower with your Liberal cronies.Rockie wrote: ↑Fri May 08, 2020 5:52 pm Ok, the argument. Where in Lord Pompous Prick’s solution does he reference public health and medical authorities recommendations on how to safely re-open society? Like Trump he considers himself another stable genius who knows more about everything than everybody.
Nobody falls for it except the Ripplerocks and Pelmets of the world. For every two-bit conman there are bigger suckers.
Keep believing the statistics lie. The rest of us are waking up to reality and the idiocy.
-
RippleRock
- Rank 7
- Posts: 637
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:15 pm
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
Pelmet........remember that someone with over 7700 posts on AvCanada has not much else to do than post on AvCanada.
He likes to read his own opinion. Speaks volumes.
He likes to read his own opinion. Speaks volumes.
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
Number of posts is irrelevant. But once again, he just insults instead of providing any logical argument...because he has none....except, follow the medical authorities regardless of how many times it changes.RippleRock wrote: ↑Fri May 08, 2020 7:45 pm Pelmet........remember that someone with over 7700 posts on AvCanada has not much else to do than post on AvCanada.
He likes to read his own opinion. Speaks volumes.
Follow my suggestions...quarantine the vulnerable as much as possible and let the rest get back to work.
-
'97 Tercel
- Rank 8
- Posts: 775
- Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:19 pm
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
The Trudeau government is increasingly frustrated by recent barbs thrown at it by Premier François Legault and struggles to understand Quebec’s decision to be the first province to gradually reopen all the while being the hardest hit by the COVID-19 virus.
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/w ... ailsignout
haha, ah Quebec.. the hardest hit, and the first to re-open.... and also they want the military to help look after some elderly people.
Re: Coronavirus Numbers
Number of posts is irrelevant. But once again, he just insults instead of providing any logical argument...because he has none....except, follow the medical authorities regardless of how many times it changes.
[/quote]
Well now we can agree on something Pelmet, I do support following the medical authorities advise. Congratulations for picking up on that. As far as insults go you’re only reading a tiny fraction of what I’m thinking (have to maintain decorum on a public forum). I am surprised it bothers you though since you’re one of the large group of non-PC advocates and should appreciate that someone like me went to the trouble of learning your language. But then again your messiah is the most victimized whiniest bitch on planet earth so maybe not so surprising after all.
