Jump to content

treeduck
 Share

Recommended Posts

I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

I agree with all of that. What I don't agree with is that it's unprecedented or that it threatens to wipe out civilization as we know it. Death counts will be high - not far out of line with 1957 or 1968 - but compounding the tragedy of losing our oldest and sickest citizens before their time with orchestrated economic misery doesn't make much sense to me.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current chart of U.S. deaths from Covid (even as we already KNOW that this number is inflated as I have pointed out in articles such as the guy in Colorado who died with a BAC of .45 yet was labeled as a covid death):

 

Screenshot-2020-06-22-United-States-Coronavirus-2-357-323-Cases-and-122-259-Deaths-Worldometer.png

 

We should be happy to see that people like grep have been wrong since day one. We should be celebrating it. Yet some of you almost seem disappointed. Weird.

 

The Washington Post used to publish this graph on their website and mobile app all day, every day. That is, the published it until recently, as the daily numbers continued their distinctive pattern of decline. Now, they have replaced it with a graph showing the states with the largest case increases over the last week, which shows that number in the U.S. as a whole, and five other states.

 

So over the past week, the U.S has had an increase in cases at a rate of 8 per 100,000.

 

Arizona 34

South Carolina 17

Florida 15

Texas 12

Oklahoma 8

 

This is all per 100,000 people.

 

It seems we've switched from reporting on the number of deaths (because it, thankfully, keeps declining) to the number of new cases, because that has shown an increase.

Which is actually good news, if the number of deaths don't go up. That means the mortality rate is going down. The deaths number lags behind the new cases numbers though, which lag two to three weeks behind contracting the virus. What happened two to three weeks ago that could have caused the new cases numbers to spike?

 

I hope the number of deaths, and thus the mortality rate continues to decline.

According to this, hospital resource use, which is a closer leading indicator of deaths, is still flat to decreasing.

 

https://covid19.heal...ates-of-america

That's one of the only graphs I've seen that makes the U.S. look good by comparison.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes it is. But I was specifically talking about the combination of an increased number of new cases coupled with a decreased death rate. Like I say though, it may be too soon to celebrate that because the deaths and hospitalizations could still increase. My gut feeling is that the mortality number is going down though as we learn to deal with it.

 

Yes, I meant all that within the context of increasing cases, but still decreasing death rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current chart of U.S. deaths from Covid (even as we already KNOW that this number is inflated as I have pointed out in articles such as the guy in Colorado who died with a BAC of .45 yet was labeled as a covid death):

 

Screenshot-2020-06-22-United-States-Coronavirus-2-357-323-Cases-and-122-259-Deaths-Worldometer.png

 

We should be happy to see that people like grep have been wrong since day one. We should be celebrating it. Yet some of you almost seem disappointed. Weird.

 

The Washington Post used to publish this graph on their website and mobile app all day, every day. That is, the published it until recently, as the daily numbers continued their distinctive pattern of decline. Now, they have replaced it with a graph showing the states with the largest case increases over the last week, which shows that number in the U.S. as a whole, and five other states.

 

So over the past week, the U.S has had an increase in cases at a rate of 8 per 100,000.

 

Arizona 34

South Carolina 17

Florida 15

Texas 12

Oklahoma 8

 

This is all per 100,000 people.

 

It seems we've switched from reporting on the number of deaths (because it, thankfully, keeps declining) to the number of new cases, because that has shown an increase.

Which is actually good news, if the number of deaths don't go up. That means the mortality rate is going down. The deaths number lags behind the new cases numbers though, which lag two to three weeks behind contracting the virus. What happened two to three weeks ago that could have caused the new cases numbers to spike?

 

I hope the number of deaths, and thus the mortality rate continues to decline.

 

The rate of deaths is going down. Great news!

 

The rate of hospitalization is a mixed bag, depending on the state, apparently. But it is not exploding or rising across the board. This is also good news.

Yes it is. But I was specifically talking about the combination of an increased number of new cases coupled with a decreased death rate. Like I say though, it may be too soon to celebrate that because the deaths and hospitalizations could still increase. My gut feeling is that the mortality number is going down though as we learn to deal with it.

The information that will be the greatest determinant of deaths is the demographic makeup of the newly infected.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current chart of U.S. deaths from Covid (even as we already KNOW that this number is inflated as I have pointed out in articles such as the guy in Colorado who died with a BAC of .45 yet was labeled as a covid death):

 

Screenshot-2020-06-22-United-States-Coronavirus-2-357-323-Cases-and-122-259-Deaths-Worldometer.png

 

We should be happy to see that people like grep have been wrong since day one. We should be celebrating it. Yet some of you almost seem disappointed. Weird.

 

The Washington Post used to publish this graph on their website and mobile app all day, every day. That is, the published it until recently, as the daily numbers continued their distinctive pattern of decline. Now, they have replaced it with a graph showing the states with the largest case increases over the last week, which shows that number in the U.S. as a whole, and five other states.

 

So over the past week, the U.S has had an increase in cases at a rate of 8 per 100,000.

 

Arizona 34

South Carolina 17

Florida 15

Texas 12

Oklahoma 8

 

This is all per 100,000 people.

 

It seems we've switched from reporting on the number of deaths (because it, thankfully, keeps declining) to the number of new cases, because that has shown an increase.

Which is actually good news, if the number of deaths don't go up. That means the mortality rate is going down. The deaths number lags behind the new cases numbers though, which lag two to three weeks behind contracting the virus. What happened two to three weeks ago that could have caused the new cases numbers to spike?

 

I hope the number of deaths, and thus the mortality rate continues to decline.

 

The rate of deaths is going down. Great news!

 

The rate of hospitalization is a mixed bag, depending on the state, apparently. But it is not exploding or rising across the board. This is also good news.

 

I was listening to a podcast recently, and the guest, a doctor, was talking about the fact that this is expected in epidemiology. A virus apparently loses its potency as it works its way through a population, so that the first people who get it are getting a "stronger dose," than people who get it months later.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current chart of U.S. deaths from Covid (even as we already KNOW that this number is inflated as I have pointed out in articles such as the guy in Colorado who died with a BAC of .45 yet was labeled as a covid death):

 

Screenshot-2020-06-22-United-States-Coronavirus-2-357-323-Cases-and-122-259-Deaths-Worldometer.png

 

We should be happy to see that people like grep have been wrong since day one. We should be celebrating it. Yet some of you almost seem disappointed. Weird.

 

The Washington Post used to publish this graph on their website and mobile app all day, every day. That is, the published it until recently, as the daily numbers continued their distinctive pattern of decline. Now, they have replaced it with a graph showing the states with the largest case increases over the last week, which shows that number in the U.S. as a whole, and five other states.

 

So over the past week, the U.S has had an increase in cases at a rate of 8 per 100,000.

 

Arizona 34

South Carolina 17

Florida 15

Texas 12

Oklahoma 8

 

This is all per 100,000 people.

 

It seems we've switched from reporting on the number of deaths (because it, thankfully, keeps declining) to the number of new cases, because that has shown an increase.

Which is actually good news, if the number of deaths don't go up. That means the mortality rate is going down. The deaths number lags behind the new cases numbers though, which lag two to three weeks behind contracting the virus. What happened two to three weeks ago that could have caused the new cases numbers to spike?

 

I hope the number of deaths, and thus the mortality rate continues to decline.

 

The rate of deaths is going down. Great news!

 

The rate of hospitalization is a mixed bag, depending on the state, apparently. But it is not exploding or rising across the board. This is also good news.

Yes it is. But I was specifically talking about the combination of an increased number of new cases coupled with a decreased death rate. Like I say though, it may be too soon to celebrate that because the deaths and hospitalizations could still increase. My gut feeling is that the mortality number is going down though as we learn to deal with it.

The information that will be the greatest determinant of deaths is the demographic makeup of the newly infected.

That's true.

 

Are there accurate numbers that reflect the demographics of the newly infected?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current chart of U.S. deaths from Covid (even as we already KNOW that this number is inflated as I have pointed out in articles such as the guy in Colorado who died with a BAC of .45 yet was labeled as a covid death):

 

Screenshot-2020-06-22-United-States-Coronavirus-2-357-323-Cases-and-122-259-Deaths-Worldometer.png

 

We should be happy to see that people like grep have been wrong since day one. We should be celebrating it. Yet some of you almost seem disappointed. Weird.

 

The Washington Post used to publish this graph on their website and mobile app all day, every day. That is, the published it until recently, as the daily numbers continued their distinctive pattern of decline. Now, they have replaced it with a graph showing the states with the largest case increases over the last week, which shows that number in the U.S. as a whole, and five other states.

 

So over the past week, the U.S has had an increase in cases at a rate of 8 per 100,000.

 

Arizona 34

South Carolina 17

Florida 15

Texas 12

Oklahoma 8

 

This is all per 100,000 people.

 

It seems we've switched from reporting on the number of deaths (because it, thankfully, keeps declining) to the number of new cases, because that has shown an increase.

Which is actually good news, if the number of deaths don't go up. That means the mortality rate is going down. The deaths number lags behind the new cases numbers though, which lag two to three weeks behind contracting the virus. What happened two to three weeks ago that could have caused the new cases numbers to spike?

 

I hope the number of deaths, and thus the mortality rate continues to decline.

 

The rate of deaths is going down. Great news!

 

The rate of hospitalization is a mixed bag, depending on the state, apparently. But it is not exploding or rising across the board. This is also good news.

Yes it is. But I was specifically talking about the combination of an increased number of new cases coupled with a decreased death rate. Like I say though, it may be too soon to celebrate that because the deaths and hospitalizations could still increase. My gut feeling is that the mortality number is going down though as we learn to deal with it.

The information that will be the greatest determinant of deaths is the demographic makeup of the newly infected.

That's true.

 

Are there accurate numbers that reflect the demographics of the newly infected?

I haven't seen any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of positive tests in La Crosse County (WI) has increased 600% in the last 5 weeks.

It's gone from 35 total cases on May 12th to 195 today. Over 60 new cases in the last 3 days - all young adults.

Taverns, beaches, and other public places are being shut down again. :o

 

Looking at your state, your deaths are going down:

 

So what could possibly be going on in 5 weeks that would cause say 5 times the number of cases (in your county anyway) in a 5 weeks period?

Maybe doing 5 times the amount of daily tests compared to 5 weeks ago?

 

Crazy, but seems like the more people we test the more "positive cases" we find. You are doing almost exactly 5x the amount of tests from 5 weeks ago. (2,000 daily tests 5 weeks ago, almost 10,000 now).

 

I was just stating the facts about my county. We've been very fortunate to have no deaths from covid-19. I also know that our good fortune could change at any time.

 

Yes, we've been testing more people, which is always a good thing. We're discovering how widespread the virus is. Our #1 concern in La Crosse County is irresponsible people going out and about (taverns, beaches, fest grounds, etc.), contracting the virus, and spreading it to more and more people. When that happens, the likelihood of people dying from the virus will increase.

 

I'm 58 years old and I live with and take care of my mother, who is 80 years old and has several major health issues, such as diabetes and heart/lung issues. If some young and irresponsible person happens to infect me at a grocery store, or at my place of employment, what should I do? Should I go live in a motel until I test negative...assuming that I don't die? Should I tell my mother, "Hey, Ma, we don't matter, because the economy is far more important than our lives."?? Shall I tell her that we're part of the "Acceptable Losses" statistic?

Yes. Sorry.

 

There are dangers in the world and quite frankly your mother probably has a much bigger chance of dying from something else.

 

We don't shut down the world because someone might get sick.

 

You have 118,000 people in La Crosse County. You have had 195 "confirmed" cases and 0 deaths. Seriously, think about that for a minute. Is that really something to be worried about on the level you seem to be?

 

Because your mother is elderly and has health issues you should be careful, just as you should during the flu season.

 

Wow, what a heartless comment. Bet your point of view would alter significantly if someone you know gets COVID 19. It just saddens me that so many think they have the right to endanger others lives with such arrogance. Yes people die every day but purposefully telling some one tough sh*t you weren't lucky is clueless. :eyeroll:

 

Quoted for truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the side of your head. You came in here harassing a good standing member, Narps, all over this place, spewing absolute false information - absolute complete lies - saying how the r0 factor was as high as 5, exaggerating every single number you spewed out to create some scare or panic. I presented you with facts and instead of discussing them or debating them, you ran away. Quoted for truth? LMAO. You are pathetic.

 

r0 can be as high as 5. They just don't know yet. But ...that's a lie.

 

I'm still here. Just letting you rant and rave.

 

Call me some more names. Come on - I want you to. 'Pathetic' isn't nasty enough. Let it all out

Yet I have proven to you that it is not 5.0 (or 5.6 which you claimed). It isn't 5.0 or 5.6 or anything close to that. I have proven that to you in link after link. Mathematically it isn't even possible at this point. How can you even claim that still?

 

http://www.therushfo...00#entry4769342

 

Good. If I was wrong about that, then I was wrong.

 

I see reopenings, I see 49 people turning up positive after one night in a bar... Even though some may have been infected, before going in - it's still a high number. So how fast can the thing really spread?

 

I accepted pessimistic estimates early on in the lifecycle, and had a hard time with the perception that some couldn't take the situation as seriously as I felt appropriate. Fear.

 

Frankly, I'm still afraid. Those ICU and morgue videos I saw aren't out of my memory just yet. With the more recent news that even younger people have serious complications, (Decreased lung capacity, athletes now needing dialysis as examples) I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

There you go. Explanations, and no edits.

 

That's fine, but that returns to a point I made a while back. Surely you must agree then that the protests in the wake of George Floyd's death were incredibly irresponsible and dangerous, right? Why did public health officials, not just politicians, either a) disappear from public discourse or b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I don't know that they disappeared. Fauchi and Brix are still with us, and I think they both said that the protests were dangerous in terms of spreading the virus. I think that the media just hasn't been giving them focus, for whatever reason.

 

>>b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I honestly don't understand the second part of your question. Can you rephrase that.

 

I will say that systemic racism is a huge f***ing problem, and I hope that finally change will come. Should have been a long time ago, rather than co-incide with a global pandemic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of positive tests in La Crosse County (WI) has increased 600% in the last 5 weeks.

It's gone from 35 total cases on May 12th to 195 today. Over 60 new cases in the last 3 days - all young adults.

Taverns, beaches, and other public places are being shut down again. :o

 

Looking at your state, your deaths are going down:

 

So what could possibly be going on in 5 weeks that would cause say 5 times the number of cases (in your county anyway) in a 5 weeks period?

Maybe doing 5 times the amount of daily tests compared to 5 weeks ago?

 

Crazy, but seems like the more people we test the more "positive cases" we find. You are doing almost exactly 5x the amount of tests from 5 weeks ago. (2,000 daily tests 5 weeks ago, almost 10,000 now).

 

I was just stating the facts about my county. We've been very fortunate to have no deaths from covid-19. I also know that our good fortune could change at any time.

 

Yes, we've been testing more people, which is always a good thing. We're discovering how widespread the virus is. Our #1 concern in La Crosse County is irresponsible people going out and about (taverns, beaches, fest grounds, etc.), contracting the virus, and spreading it to more and more people. When that happens, the likelihood of people dying from the virus will increase.

 

I'm 58 years old and I live with and take care of my mother, who is 80 years old and has several major health issues, such as diabetes and heart/lung issues. If some young and irresponsible person happens to infect me at a grocery store, or at my place of employment, what should I do? Should I go live in a motel until I test negative...assuming that I don't die? Should I tell my mother, "Hey, Ma, we don't matter, because the economy is far more important than our lives."?? Shall I tell her that we're part of the "Acceptable Losses" statistic?

Yes. Sorry.

 

There are dangers in the world and quite frankly your mother probably has a much bigger chance of dying from something else.

 

We don't shut down the world because someone might get sick.

 

You have 118,000 people in La Crosse County. You have had 195 "confirmed" cases and 0 deaths. Seriously, think about that for a minute. Is that really something to be worried about on the level you seem to be?

 

Because your mother is elderly and has health issues you should be careful, just as you should during the flu season.

 

Wow, what a heartless comment. Bet your point of view would alter significantly if someone you know gets COVID 19. It just saddens me that so many think they have the right to endanger others lives with such arrogance. Yes people die every day but purposefully telling some one tough sh*t you weren't lucky is clueless. :eyeroll:

 

Quoted for truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the side of your head. You came in here harassing a good standing member, Narps, all over this place, spewing absolute false information - absolute complete lies - saying how the r0 factor was as high as 5, exaggerating every single number you spewed out to create some scare or panic. I presented you with facts and instead of discussing them or debating them, you ran away. Quoted for truth? LMAO. You are pathetic.

 

r0 can be as high as 5. They just don't know yet. But ...that's a lie.

 

I'm still here. Just letting you rant and rave.

 

Call me some more names. Come on - I want you to. 'Pathetic' isn't nasty enough. Let it all out

Yet I have proven to you that it is not 5.0 (or 5.6 which you claimed). It isn't 5.0 or 5.6 or anything close to that. I have proven that to you in link after link. Mathematically it isn't even possible at this point. How can you even claim that still?

 

http://www.therushfo...00#entry4769342

 

Good. If I was wrong about that, then I was wrong.

 

I see reopenings, I see 49 people turning up positive after one night in a bar... Even though some may have been infected, before going in - it's still a high number. So how fast can the thing really spread?

 

I accepted pessimistic estimates early on in the lifecycle, and had a hard time with the perception that some couldn't take the situation as seriously as I felt appropriate. Fear.

 

Frankly, I'm still afraid. Those ICU and morgue videos I saw aren't out of my memory just yet. With the more recent news that even younger people have serious complications, (Decreased lung capacity, athletes now needing dialysis as examples) I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

There you go. Explanations, and no edits.

 

That's fine, but that returns to a point I made a while back. Surely you must agree then that the protests in the wake of George Floyd's death were incredibly irresponsible and dangerous, right? Why did public health officials, not just politicians, either a) disappear from public discourse or b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I don't know that they disappeared. Fauchi and Brix are still with us, and I think they both said that the protests were dangerous in terms of spreading the virus. I think that the media just hasn't been giving them focus, for whatever reason.

 

>>b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I honestly don't understand the second part of your question. Can you rephrase that.

 

I will say that systemic racism is a huge f***ing problem, and I hope that finally change will come. Should have been a long time ago, rather than co-incide with a global pandemic.

 

Sure. Here's an excerpt from what over 1,000 health care professionals said in an open letter:

 

"However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators' ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders."

 

If someone is truly concerned about the risk of the spread of a virus, and is taking a serious position based upon the science, you'd have to agree that why people are gathered in groups is irrelevant to the question of whether that will spread a virus, no?

 

https://www.cnn.com/...trnd/index.html

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of positive tests in La Crosse County (WI) has increased 600% in the last 5 weeks.

It's gone from 35 total cases on May 12th to 195 today. Over 60 new cases in the last 3 days - all young adults.

Taverns, beaches, and other public places are being shut down again. :o

 

Looking at your state, your deaths are going down:

 

So what could possibly be going on in 5 weeks that would cause say 5 times the number of cases (in your county anyway) in a 5 weeks period?

Maybe doing 5 times the amount of daily tests compared to 5 weeks ago?

 

Crazy, but seems like the more people we test the more "positive cases" we find. You are doing almost exactly 5x the amount of tests from 5 weeks ago. (2,000 daily tests 5 weeks ago, almost 10,000 now).

 

I was just stating the facts about my county. We've been very fortunate to have no deaths from covid-19. I also know that our good fortune could change at any time.

 

Yes, we've been testing more people, which is always a good thing. We're discovering how widespread the virus is. Our #1 concern in La Crosse County is irresponsible people going out and about (taverns, beaches, fest grounds, etc.), contracting the virus, and spreading it to more and more people. When that happens, the likelihood of people dying from the virus will increase.

 

I'm 58 years old and I live with and take care of my mother, who is 80 years old and has several major health issues, such as diabetes and heart/lung issues. If some young and irresponsible person happens to infect me at a grocery store, or at my place of employment, what should I do? Should I go live in a motel until I test negative...assuming that I don't die? Should I tell my mother, "Hey, Ma, we don't matter, because the economy is far more important than our lives."?? Shall I tell her that we're part of the "Acceptable Losses" statistic?

Yes. Sorry.

 

There are dangers in the world and quite frankly your mother probably has a much bigger chance of dying from something else.

 

We don't shut down the world because someone might get sick.

 

You have 118,000 people in La Crosse County. You have had 195 "confirmed" cases and 0 deaths. Seriously, think about that for a minute. Is that really something to be worried about on the level you seem to be?

 

Because your mother is elderly and has health issues you should be careful, just as you should during the flu season.

 

Wow, what a heartless comment. Bet your point of view would alter significantly if someone you know gets COVID 19. It just saddens me that so many think they have the right to endanger others lives with such arrogance. Yes people die every day but purposefully telling some one tough sh*t you weren't lucky is clueless. :eyeroll:

 

Quoted for truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the side of your head. You came in here harassing a good standing member, Narps, all over this place, spewing absolute false information - absolute complete lies - saying how the r0 factor was as high as 5, exaggerating every single number you spewed out to create some scare or panic. I presented you with facts and instead of discussing them or debating them, you ran away. Quoted for truth? LMAO. You are pathetic.

 

r0 can be as high as 5. They just don't know yet. But ...that's a lie.

 

I'm still here. Just letting you rant and rave.

 

Call me some more names. Come on - I want you to. 'Pathetic' isn't nasty enough. Let it all out

Yet I have proven to you that it is not 5.0 (or 5.6 which you claimed). It isn't 5.0 or 5.6 or anything close to that. I have proven that to you in link after link. Mathematically it isn't even possible at this point. How can you even claim that still?

 

http://www.therushfo...00#entry4769342

 

Good. If I was wrong about that, then I was wrong.

 

I see reopenings, I see 49 people turning up positive after one night in a bar... Even though some may have been infected, before going in - it's still a high number. So how fast can the thing really spread?

 

I accepted pessimistic estimates early on in the lifecycle, and had a hard time with the perception that some couldn't take the situation as seriously as I felt appropriate. Fear.

 

Frankly, I'm still afraid. Those ICU and morgue videos I saw aren't out of my memory just yet. With the more recent news that even younger people have serious complications, (Decreased lung capacity, athletes now needing dialysis as examples) I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

There you go. Explanations, and no edits.

 

That's fine, but that returns to a point I made a while back. Surely you must agree then that the protests in the wake of George Floyd's death were incredibly irresponsible and dangerous, right? Why did public health officials, not just politicians, either a) disappear from public discourse or b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I don't know that they disappeared. Fauchi and Brix are still with us, and I think they both said that the protests were dangerous in terms of spreading the virus. I think that the media just hasn't been giving them focus, for whatever reason.

 

>>b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I honestly don't understand the second part of your question. Can you rephrase that.

 

I will say that systemic racism is a huge f***ing problem, and I hope that finally change will come. Should have been a long time ago, rather than co-incide with a global pandemic.

 

Sure. Here's an excerpt from what over 1,000 health care professionals said in an open letter:

 

"However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators' ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders."

 

If someone is truly concerned about the risk of the spread of a virus, and is taking a serious position based upon the science, you'd have to agree that why people are gathered in groups is irrelevant to the question of whether that will spread a virus, no?

 

https://www.cnn.com/...trnd/index.html

I think it's clear that certain elements of the health care industry and wide swaths of the media, through their coverage and omissions of what they covered, have shown that they view the fight against systemic racism as more important than reducing the spread of COVID, and that they consider the fight against COVID to supersede the reopening of the economy and the economic aspects of doing so. Whether you think that's true or not, let's not pretend it's not the case.

Edited by laughedatbytime
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of positive tests in La Crosse County (WI) has increased 600% in the last 5 weeks.

It's gone from 35 total cases on May 12th to 195 today. Over 60 new cases in the last 3 days - all young adults.

Taverns, beaches, and other public places are being shut down again. :o

 

Looking at your state, your deaths are going down:

 

So what could possibly be going on in 5 weeks that would cause say 5 times the number of cases (in your county anyway) in a 5 weeks period?

Maybe doing 5 times the amount of daily tests compared to 5 weeks ago?

 

Crazy, but seems like the more people we test the more "positive cases" we find. You are doing almost exactly 5x the amount of tests from 5 weeks ago. (2,000 daily tests 5 weeks ago, almost 10,000 now).

 

I was just stating the facts about my county. We've been very fortunate to have no deaths from covid-19. I also know that our good fortune could change at any time.

 

Yes, we've been testing more people, which is always a good thing. We're discovering how widespread the virus is. Our #1 concern in La Crosse County is irresponsible people going out and about (taverns, beaches, fest grounds, etc.), contracting the virus, and spreading it to more and more people. When that happens, the likelihood of people dying from the virus will increase.

 

I'm 58 years old and I live with and take care of my mother, who is 80 years old and has several major health issues, such as diabetes and heart/lung issues. If some young and irresponsible person happens to infect me at a grocery store, or at my place of employment, what should I do? Should I go live in a motel until I test negative...assuming that I don't die? Should I tell my mother, "Hey, Ma, we don't matter, because the economy is far more important than our lives."?? Shall I tell her that we're part of the "Acceptable Losses" statistic?

Yes. Sorry.

 

There are dangers in the world and quite frankly your mother probably has a much bigger chance of dying from something else.

 

We don't shut down the world because someone might get sick.

 

You have 118,000 people in La Crosse County. You have had 195 "confirmed" cases and 0 deaths. Seriously, think about that for a minute. Is that really something to be worried about on the level you seem to be?

 

Because your mother is elderly and has health issues you should be careful, just as you should during the flu season.

 

Wow, what a heartless comment. Bet your point of view would alter significantly if someone you know gets COVID 19. It just saddens me that so many think they have the right to endanger others lives with such arrogance. Yes people die every day but purposefully telling some one tough sh*t you weren't lucky is clueless. :eyeroll:

 

Quoted for truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the side of your head. You came in here harassing a good standing member, Narps, all over this place, spewing absolute false information - absolute complete lies - saying how the r0 factor was as high as 5, exaggerating every single number you spewed out to create some scare or panic. I presented you with facts and instead of discussing them or debating them, you ran away. Quoted for truth? LMAO. You are pathetic.

 

r0 can be as high as 5. They just don't know yet. But ...that's a lie.

 

I'm still here. Just letting you rant and rave.

 

Call me some more names. Come on - I want you to. 'Pathetic' isn't nasty enough. Let it all out

Yet I have proven to you that it is not 5.0 (or 5.6 which you claimed). It isn't 5.0 or 5.6 or anything close to that. I have proven that to you in link after link. Mathematically it isn't even possible at this point. How can you even claim that still?

 

http://www.therushfo...00#entry4769342

 

Good. If I was wrong about that, then I was wrong.

 

I see reopenings, I see 49 people turning up positive after one night in a bar... Even though some may have been infected, before going in - it's still a high number. So how fast can the thing really spread?

 

I accepted pessimistic estimates early on in the lifecycle, and had a hard time with the perception that some couldn't take the situation as seriously as I felt appropriate. Fear.

 

Frankly, I'm still afraid. Those ICU and morgue videos I saw aren't out of my memory just yet. With the more recent news that even younger people have serious complications, (Decreased lung capacity, athletes now needing dialysis as examples) I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

There you go. Explanations, and no edits.

 

That's fine, but that returns to a point I made a while back. Surely you must agree then that the protests in the wake of George Floyd's death were incredibly irresponsible and dangerous, right? Why did public health officials, not just politicians, either a) disappear from public discourse or b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I don't know that they disappeared. Fauchi and Brix are still with us, and I think they both said that the protests were dangerous in terms of spreading the virus. I think that the media just hasn't been giving them focus, for whatever reason.

 

>>b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I honestly don't understand the second part of your question. Can you rephrase that.

 

I will say that systemic racism is a huge f***ing problem, and I hope that finally change will come. Should have been a long time ago, rather than co-incide with a global pandemic.

 

Sure. Here's an excerpt from what over 1,000 health care professionals said in an open letter:

 

"However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators' ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders."

 

If someone is truly concerned about the risk of the spread of a virus, and is taking a serious position based upon the science, you'd have to agree that why people are gathered in groups is irrelevant to the question of whether that will spread a virus, no?

 

https://www.cnn.com/...trnd/index.html

I think it's clear that certain elements of the health care industry and wide deaths of the media, through their coverage and omissions of what they covered, have shown that they view the fight against systemic racism as more important than reducing the spread of COVID, and that they consider the fight against COVID to supersede the reopening of the economy and the economic aspects of doing so. Whether you think that's true or not, let's not pretend it's not the case.

 

I don't see how you could reach any other conclusion when someone draws a distinction between types of "gatherings." In terms of science, whether I'm standing a foot away from someone to cheer on the Red Sox, or to protest, or to shop for pants, my chances of picking up a virus from them is the same, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of positive tests in La Crosse County (WI) has increased 600% in the last 5 weeks.

It's gone from 35 total cases on May 12th to 195 today. Over 60 new cases in the last 3 days - all young adults.

Taverns, beaches, and other public places are being shut down again. :o

 

Looking at your state, your deaths are going down:

 

So what could possibly be going on in 5 weeks that would cause say 5 times the number of cases (in your county anyway) in a 5 weeks period?

Maybe doing 5 times the amount of daily tests compared to 5 weeks ago?

 

Crazy, but seems like the more people we test the more "positive cases" we find. You are doing almost exactly 5x the amount of tests from 5 weeks ago. (2,000 daily tests 5 weeks ago, almost 10,000 now).

 

I was just stating the facts about my county. We've been very fortunate to have no deaths from covid-19. I also know that our good fortune could change at any time.

 

Yes, we've been testing more people, which is always a good thing. We're discovering how widespread the virus is. Our #1 concern in La Crosse County is irresponsible people going out and about (taverns, beaches, fest grounds, etc.), contracting the virus, and spreading it to more and more people. When that happens, the likelihood of people dying from the virus will increase.

 

I'm 58 years old and I live with and take care of my mother, who is 80 years old and has several major health issues, such as diabetes and heart/lung issues. If some young and irresponsible person happens to infect me at a grocery store, or at my place of employment, what should I do? Should I go live in a motel until I test negative...assuming that I don't die? Should I tell my mother, "Hey, Ma, we don't matter, because the economy is far more important than our lives."?? Shall I tell her that we're part of the "Acceptable Losses" statistic?

Yes. Sorry.

 

There are dangers in the world and quite frankly your mother probably has a much bigger chance of dying from something else.

 

We don't shut down the world because someone might get sick.

 

You have 118,000 people in La Crosse County. You have had 195 "confirmed" cases and 0 deaths. Seriously, think about that for a minute. Is that really something to be worried about on the level you seem to be?

 

Because your mother is elderly and has health issues you should be careful, just as you should during the flu season.

 

Wow, what a heartless comment. Bet your point of view would alter significantly if someone you know gets COVID 19. It just saddens me that so many think they have the right to endanger others lives with such arrogance. Yes people die every day but purposefully telling some one tough sh*t you weren't lucky is clueless. :eyeroll:

 

Quoted for truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the side of your head. You came in here harassing a good standing member, Narps, all over this place, spewing absolute false information - absolute complete lies - saying how the r0 factor was as high as 5, exaggerating every single number you spewed out to create some scare or panic. I presented you with facts and instead of discussing them or debating them, you ran away. Quoted for truth? LMAO. You are pathetic.

 

r0 can be as high as 5. They just don't know yet. But ...that's a lie.

 

I'm still here. Just letting you rant and rave.

 

Call me some more names. Come on - I want you to. 'Pathetic' isn't nasty enough. Let it all out

Yet I have proven to you that it is not 5.0 (or 5.6 which you claimed). It isn't 5.0 or 5.6 or anything close to that. I have proven that to you in link after link. Mathematically it isn't even possible at this point. How can you even claim that still?

 

http://www.therushfo...00#entry4769342

 

Good. If I was wrong about that, then I was wrong.

 

I see reopenings, I see 49 people turning up positive after one night in a bar... Even though some may have been infected, before going in - it's still a high number. So how fast can the thing really spread?

 

I accepted pessimistic estimates early on in the lifecycle, and had a hard time with the perception that some couldn't take the situation as seriously as I felt appropriate. Fear.

 

Frankly, I'm still afraid. Those ICU and morgue videos I saw aren't out of my memory just yet. With the more recent news that even younger people have serious complications, (Decreased lung capacity, athletes now needing dialysis as examples) I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

There you go. Explanations, and no edits.

 

That's fine, but that returns to a point I made a while back. Surely you must agree then that the protests in the wake of George Floyd's death were incredibly irresponsible and dangerous, right? Why did public health officials, not just politicians, either a) disappear from public discourse or b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I don't know that they disappeared. Fauchi and Brix are still with us, and I think they both said that the protests were dangerous in terms of spreading the virus. I think that the media just hasn't been giving them focus, for whatever reason.

 

>>b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I honestly don't understand the second part of your question. Can you rephrase that.

 

I will say that systemic racism is a huge f***ing problem, and I hope that finally change will come. Should have been a long time ago, rather than co-incide with a global pandemic.

 

Sure. Here's an excerpt from what over 1,000 health care professionals said in an open letter:

 

"However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators' ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders."

 

If someone is truly concerned about the risk of the spread of a virus, and is taking a serious position based upon the science, you'd have to agree that why people are gathered in groups is irrelevant to the question of whether that will spread a virus, no?

 

https://www.cnn.com/...trnd/index.html

I think it's clear that certain elements of the health care industry and wide deaths of the media, through their coverage and omissions of what they covered, have shown that they view the fight against systemic racism as more important than reducing the spread of COVID, and that they consider the fight against COVID to supersede the reopening of the economy and the economic aspects of doing so. Whether you think that's true or not, let's not pretend it's not the case.

 

I don't see how you could reach any other conclusion when someone draws a distinction between types of "gatherings." In terms of science, whether I'm standing a foot away from someone to cheer on the Red Sox, or to protest, or to shop for pants, my chances of picking up a virus from them is the same, right?

Swaths, not deaths in my post. JFC, I hate spell check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of positive tests in La Crosse County (WI) has increased 600% in the last 5 weeks.

It's gone from 35 total cases on May 12th to 195 today. Over 60 new cases in the last 3 days - all young adults.

Taverns, beaches, and other public places are being shut down again. :o

 

Looking at your state, your deaths are going down:

 

So what could possibly be going on in 5 weeks that would cause say 5 times the number of cases (in your county anyway) in a 5 weeks period?

Maybe doing 5 times the amount of daily tests compared to 5 weeks ago?

 

Crazy, but seems like the more people we test the more "positive cases" we find. You are doing almost exactly 5x the amount of tests from 5 weeks ago. (2,000 daily tests 5 weeks ago, almost 10,000 now).

 

I was just stating the facts about my county. We've been very fortunate to have no deaths from covid-19. I also know that our good fortune could change at any time.

 

Yes, we've been testing more people, which is always a good thing. We're discovering how widespread the virus is. Our #1 concern in La Crosse County is irresponsible people going out and about (taverns, beaches, fest grounds, etc.), contracting the virus, and spreading it to more and more people. When that happens, the likelihood of people dying from the virus will increase.

 

I'm 58 years old and I live with and take care of my mother, who is 80 years old and has several major health issues, such as diabetes and heart/lung issues. If some young and irresponsible person happens to infect me at a grocery store, or at my place of employment, what should I do? Should I go live in a motel until I test negative...assuming that I don't die? Should I tell my mother, "Hey, Ma, we don't matter, because the economy is far more important than our lives."?? Shall I tell her that we're part of the "Acceptable Losses" statistic?

Yes. Sorry.

 

There are dangers in the world and quite frankly your mother probably has a much bigger chance of dying from something else.

 

We don't shut down the world because someone might get sick.

 

You have 118,000 people in La Crosse County. You have had 195 "confirmed" cases and 0 deaths. Seriously, think about that for a minute. Is that really something to be worried about on the level you seem to be?

 

Because your mother is elderly and has health issues you should be careful, just as you should during the flu season.

 

Wow, what a heartless comment. Bet your point of view would alter significantly if someone you know gets COVID 19. It just saddens me that so many think they have the right to endanger others lives with such arrogance. Yes people die every day but purposefully telling some one tough sh*t you weren't lucky is clueless. :eyeroll:

 

Quoted for truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the side of your head. You came in here harassing a good standing member, Narps, all over this place, spewing absolute false information - absolute complete lies - saying how the r0 factor was as high as 5, exaggerating every single number you spewed out to create some scare or panic. I presented you with facts and instead of discussing them or debating them, you ran away. Quoted for truth? LMAO. You are pathetic.

 

r0 can be as high as 5. They just don't know yet. But ...that's a lie.

 

I'm still here. Just letting you rant and rave.

 

Call me some more names. Come on - I want you to. 'Pathetic' isn't nasty enough. Let it all out

Yet I have proven to you that it is not 5.0 (or 5.6 which you claimed). It isn't 5.0 or 5.6 or anything close to that. I have proven that to you in link after link. Mathematically it isn't even possible at this point. How can you even claim that still?

 

http://www.therushfo...00#entry4769342

 

Good. If I was wrong about that, then I was wrong.

 

I see reopenings, I see 49 people turning up positive after one night in a bar... Even though some may have been infected, before going in - it's still a high number. So how fast can the thing really spread?

 

I accepted pessimistic estimates early on in the lifecycle, and had a hard time with the perception that some couldn't take the situation as seriously as I felt appropriate. Fear.

 

Frankly, I'm still afraid. Those ICU and morgue videos I saw aren't out of my memory just yet. With the more recent news that even younger people have serious complications, (Decreased lung capacity, athletes now needing dialysis as examples) I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

There you go. Explanations, and no edits.

 

That's fine, but that returns to a point I made a while back. Surely you must agree then that the protests in the wake of George Floyd's death were incredibly irresponsible and dangerous, right? Why did public health officials, not just politicians, either a) disappear from public discourse or b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I don't know that they disappeared. Fauchi and Brix are still with us, and I think they both said that the protests were dangerous in terms of spreading the virus. I think that the media just hasn't been giving them focus, for whatever reason.

 

>>b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I honestly don't understand the second part of your question. Can you rephrase that.

 

I will say that systemic racism is a huge f***ing problem, and I hope that finally change will come. Should have been a long time ago, rather than co-incide with a global pandemic.

 

Sure. Here's an excerpt from what over 1,000 health care professionals said in an open letter:

 

"However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators' ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders."

 

If someone is truly concerned about the risk of the spread of a virus, and is taking a serious position based upon the science, you'd have to agree that why people are gathered in groups is irrelevant to the question of whether that will spread a virus, no?

 

https://www.cnn.com/...trnd/index.html

 

I bolded the key condition of the statement. These professionals are cool with gatherings, so long as everyone is being 'safe'. (Which of course the protesters aren't for the most part).

 

Sure the reasons for gathering are irrelevant in the context of a virus. That's pretty obvious.

 

I don't understand where you're going with the line of questioning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of positive tests in La Crosse County (WI) has increased 600% in the last 5 weeks.

It's gone from 35 total cases on May 12th to 195 today. Over 60 new cases in the last 3 days - all young adults.

Taverns, beaches, and other public places are being shut down again. :o

 

Looking at your state, your deaths are going down:

 

So what could possibly be going on in 5 weeks that would cause say 5 times the number of cases (in your county anyway) in a 5 weeks period?

Maybe doing 5 times the amount of daily tests compared to 5 weeks ago?

 

Crazy, but seems like the more people we test the more "positive cases" we find. You are doing almost exactly 5x the amount of tests from 5 weeks ago. (2,000 daily tests 5 weeks ago, almost 10,000 now).

 

I was just stating the facts about my county. We've been very fortunate to have no deaths from covid-19. I also know that our good fortune could change at any time.

 

Yes, we've been testing more people, which is always a good thing. We're discovering how widespread the virus is. Our #1 concern in La Crosse County is irresponsible people going out and about (taverns, beaches, fest grounds, etc.), contracting the virus, and spreading it to more and more people. When that happens, the likelihood of people dying from the virus will increase.

 

I'm 58 years old and I live with and take care of my mother, who is 80 years old and has several major health issues, such as diabetes and heart/lung issues. If some young and irresponsible person happens to infect me at a grocery store, or at my place of employment, what should I do? Should I go live in a motel until I test negative...assuming that I don't die? Should I tell my mother, "Hey, Ma, we don't matter, because the economy is far more important than our lives."?? Shall I tell her that we're part of the "Acceptable Losses" statistic?

Yes. Sorry.

 

There are dangers in the world and quite frankly your mother probably has a much bigger chance of dying from something else.

 

We don't shut down the world because someone might get sick.

 

You have 118,000 people in La Crosse County. You have had 195 "confirmed" cases and 0 deaths. Seriously, think about that for a minute. Is that really something to be worried about on the level you seem to be?

 

Because your mother is elderly and has health issues you should be careful, just as you should during the flu season.

 

Wow, what a heartless comment. Bet your point of view would alter significantly if someone you know gets COVID 19. It just saddens me that so many think they have the right to endanger others lives with such arrogance. Yes people die every day but purposefully telling some one tough sh*t you weren't lucky is clueless. :eyeroll:

 

Quoted for truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the side of your head. You came in here harassing a good standing member, Narps, all over this place, spewing absolute false information - absolute complete lies - saying how the r0 factor was as high as 5, exaggerating every single number you spewed out to create some scare or panic. I presented you with facts and instead of discussing them or debating them, you ran away. Quoted for truth? LMAO. You are pathetic.

 

r0 can be as high as 5. They just don't know yet. But ...that's a lie.

 

I'm still here. Just letting you rant and rave.

 

Call me some more names. Come on - I want you to. 'Pathetic' isn't nasty enough. Let it all out

Yet I have proven to you that it is not 5.0 (or 5.6 which you claimed). It isn't 5.0 or 5.6 or anything close to that. I have proven that to you in link after link. Mathematically it isn't even possible at this point. How can you even claim that still?

 

http://www.therushfo...00#entry4769342

 

Good. If I was wrong about that, then I was wrong.

 

I see reopenings, I see 49 people turning up positive after one night in a bar... Even though some may have been infected, before going in - it's still a high number. So how fast can the thing really spread?

 

I accepted pessimistic estimates early on in the lifecycle, and had a hard time with the perception that some couldn't take the situation as seriously as I felt appropriate. Fear.

 

Frankly, I'm still afraid. Those ICU and morgue videos I saw aren't out of my memory just yet. With the more recent news that even younger people have serious complications, (Decreased lung capacity, athletes now needing dialysis as examples) I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

There you go. Explanations, and no edits.

 

That's fine, but that returns to a point I made a while back. Surely you must agree then that the protests in the wake of George Floyd's death were incredibly irresponsible and dangerous, right? Why did public health officials, not just politicians, either a) disappear from public discourse or b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I don't know that they disappeared. Fauchi and Brix are still with us, and I think they both said that the protests were dangerous in terms of spreading the virus. I think that the media just hasn't been giving them focus, for whatever reason.

 

>>b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I honestly don't understand the second part of your question. Can you rephrase that.

 

I will say that systemic racism is a huge f***ing problem, and I hope that finally change will come. Should have been a long time ago, rather than co-incide with a global pandemic.

 

Sure. Here's an excerpt from what over 1,000 health care professionals said in an open letter:

 

"However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators' ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders."

 

If someone is truly concerned about the risk of the spread of a virus, and is taking a serious position based upon the science, you'd have to agree that why people are gathered in groups is irrelevant to the question of whether that will spread a virus, no?

 

https://www.cnn.com/...trnd/index.html

 

I bolded the key condition of the statement. These professionals are cool with gatherings, so long as everyone is being 'safe'. (Which of course the protesters aren't for the most part).

 

Sure the reasons for gathering are irrelevant in the context of a virus. That's pretty obvious.

 

I don't understand where you're going with the line of questioning.

 

I think it undermines some of the concerns that have been voiced. About a week before Floyd was killed, my cousin's husband died. He was a really good guy (about a decade or so older than I am, I was a young teen when he came into our family, and he was always cool to talk to) and I wish I could have said goodbye to him. They didn't have a wake for him. Only a small number of people could attend the graveside service. Because of restrictions imposed by Governor Baker. A week later thousands of people were in Boston Common, with their masks ridiculously pulled down over their mouths so that they could yell and be heard. So one of two things are true. Either the health care professionals let their political bias influence their statements about the need for social distancing, or they were just wrong about the need for social distancing. Neither is good. Neither instills confidence, from me, in their advice.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of positive tests in La Crosse County (WI) has increased 600% in the last 5 weeks.

It's gone from 35 total cases on May 12th to 195 today. Over 60 new cases in the last 3 days - all young adults.

Taverns, beaches, and other public places are being shut down again. :o

 

Looking at your state, your deaths are going down:

 

So what could possibly be going on in 5 weeks that would cause say 5 times the number of cases (in your county anyway) in a 5 weeks period?

Maybe doing 5 times the amount of daily tests compared to 5 weeks ago?

 

Crazy, but seems like the more people we test the more "positive cases" we find. You are doing almost exactly 5x the amount of tests from 5 weeks ago. (2,000 daily tests 5 weeks ago, almost 10,000 now).

 

I was just stating the facts about my county. We've been very fortunate to have no deaths from covid-19. I also know that our good fortune could change at any time.

 

Yes, we've been testing more people, which is always a good thing. We're discovering how widespread the virus is. Our #1 concern in La Crosse County is irresponsible people going out and about (taverns, beaches, fest grounds, etc.), contracting the virus, and spreading it to more and more people. When that happens, the likelihood of people dying from the virus will increase.

 

I'm 58 years old and I live with and take care of my mother, who is 80 years old and has several major health issues, such as diabetes and heart/lung issues. If some young and irresponsible person happens to infect me at a grocery store, or at my place of employment, what should I do? Should I go live in a motel until I test negative...assuming that I don't die? Should I tell my mother, "Hey, Ma, we don't matter, because the economy is far more important than our lives."?? Shall I tell her that we're part of the "Acceptable Losses" statistic?

Yes. Sorry.

 

There are dangers in the world and quite frankly your mother probably has a much bigger chance of dying from something else.

 

We don't shut down the world because someone might get sick.

 

You have 118,000 people in La Crosse County. You have had 195 "confirmed" cases and 0 deaths. Seriously, think about that for a minute. Is that really something to be worried about on the level you seem to be?

 

Because your mother is elderly and has health issues you should be careful, just as you should during the flu season.

 

Wow, what a heartless comment. Bet your point of view would alter significantly if someone you know gets COVID 19. It just saddens me that so many think they have the right to endanger others lives with such arrogance. Yes people die every day but purposefully telling some one tough sh*t you weren't lucky is clueless. :eyeroll:

 

Quoted for truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the side of your head. You came in here harassing a good standing member, Narps, all over this place, spewing absolute false information - absolute complete lies - saying how the r0 factor was as high as 5, exaggerating every single number you spewed out to create some scare or panic. I presented you with facts and instead of discussing them or debating them, you ran away. Quoted for truth? LMAO. You are pathetic.

 

r0 can be as high as 5. They just don't know yet. But ...that's a lie.

 

I'm still here. Just letting you rant and rave.

 

Call me some more names. Come on - I want you to. 'Pathetic' isn't nasty enough. Let it all out

Yet I have proven to you that it is not 5.0 (or 5.6 which you claimed). It isn't 5.0 or 5.6 or anything close to that. I have proven that to you in link after link. Mathematically it isn't even possible at this point. How can you even claim that still?

 

http://www.therushfo...00#entry4769342

 

Good. If I was wrong about that, then I was wrong.

 

I see reopenings, I see 49 people turning up positive after one night in a bar... Even though some may have been infected, before going in - it's still a high number. So how fast can the thing really spread?

 

I accepted pessimistic estimates early on in the lifecycle, and had a hard time with the perception that some couldn't take the situation as seriously as I felt appropriate. Fear.

 

Frankly, I'm still afraid. Those ICU and morgue videos I saw aren't out of my memory just yet. With the more recent news that even younger people have serious complications, (Decreased lung capacity, athletes now needing dialysis as examples) I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

There you go. Explanations, and no edits.

 

That's fine, but that returns to a point I made a while back. Surely you must agree then that the protests in the wake of George Floyd's death were incredibly irresponsible and dangerous, right? Why did public health officials, not just politicians, either a) disappear from public discourse or b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I don't know that they disappeared. Fauchi and Brix are still with us, and I think they both said that the protests were dangerous in terms of spreading the virus. I think that the media just hasn't been giving them focus, for whatever reason.

 

>>b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I honestly don't understand the second part of your question. Can you rephrase that.

 

I will say that systemic racism is a huge f***ing problem, and I hope that finally change will come. Should have been a long time ago, rather than co-incide with a global pandemic.

 

Sure. Here's an excerpt from what over 1,000 health care professionals said in an open letter:

 

"However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators' ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders."

 

If someone is truly concerned about the risk of the spread of a virus, and is taking a serious position based upon the science, you'd have to agree that why people are gathered in groups is irrelevant to the question of whether that will spread a virus, no?

 

https://www.cnn.com/...trnd/index.html

 

I bolded the key condition of the statement. These professionals are cool with gatherings, so long as everyone is being 'safe'. (Which of course the protesters aren't for the most part).

 

Sure the reasons for gathering are irrelevant in the context of a virus. That's pretty obvious.

 

I don't understand where you're going with the line of questioning.

 

I think it undermines some of the concerns that have been voiced. About a week before Floyd was killed, my cousin's husband died. He was a really good guy (about a decade or so older than I am, I was a young teen when he came into our family, and he was always cool to talk to) and I wish I could have said goodbye to him. They didn't have a wake for him. Only a small number of people could attend the graveside service. Because of restrictions imposed by Governor Baker. A week later thousands of people were in Boston Common, with their masks ridiculously pulled down over their mouths so that they could yell and be heard. So one of two things are true. Either the health care professionals let their political bias influence their statements about the need for social distancing, or they were just wrong about the need for social distancing. Neither is good. Neither instills confidence, from me, in their advice.

 

 

Well, it's just my opinion, but I think the need for social distancing is there. It's the one weapon we do have to slow down the virus, by impeding it's natural path of spread.

 

Enforcing social distancing is probably easier with groups of law abiding and (mostly) complacent and complaint citizens than with a huge group of (justifiably) angry protestors.

 

I can't explain the discrepancy TBH. Because in my opinion every HC professional should be saying that the protestors are at risk of further spread. Becasue at it's core, that's how virus' do spread. From person to person in groups. Even outside....

 

Edit: Also, I am sorry for your loss.

Edited by grep
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of positive tests in La Crosse County (WI) has increased 600% in the last 5 weeks.

It's gone from 35 total cases on May 12th to 195 today. Over 60 new cases in the last 3 days - all young adults.

Taverns, beaches, and other public places are being shut down again. :o

 

Looking at your state, your deaths are going down:

 

So what could possibly be going on in 5 weeks that would cause say 5 times the number of cases (in your county anyway) in a 5 weeks period?

Maybe doing 5 times the amount of daily tests compared to 5 weeks ago?

 

Crazy, but seems like the more people we test the more "positive cases" we find. You are doing almost exactly 5x the amount of tests from 5 weeks ago. (2,000 daily tests 5 weeks ago, almost 10,000 now).

 

I was just stating the facts about my county. We've been very fortunate to have no deaths from covid-19. I also know that our good fortune could change at any time.

 

Yes, we've been testing more people, which is always a good thing. We're discovering how widespread the virus is. Our #1 concern in La Crosse County is irresponsible people going out and about (taverns, beaches, fest grounds, etc.), contracting the virus, and spreading it to more and more people. When that happens, the likelihood of people dying from the virus will increase.

 

I'm 58 years old and I live with and take care of my mother, who is 80 years old and has several major health issues, such as diabetes and heart/lung issues. If some young and irresponsible person happens to infect me at a grocery store, or at my place of employment, what should I do? Should I go live in a motel until I test negative...assuming that I don't die? Should I tell my mother, "Hey, Ma, we don't matter, because the economy is far more important than our lives."?? Shall I tell her that we're part of the "Acceptable Losses" statistic?

Yes. Sorry.

 

There are dangers in the world and quite frankly your mother probably has a much bigger chance of dying from something else.

 

We don't shut down the world because someone might get sick.

 

You have 118,000 people in La Crosse County. You have had 195 "confirmed" cases and 0 deaths. Seriously, think about that for a minute. Is that really something to be worried about on the level you seem to be?

 

Because your mother is elderly and has health issues you should be careful, just as you should during the flu season.

 

Wow, what a heartless comment. Bet your point of view would alter significantly if someone you know gets COVID 19. It just saddens me that so many think they have the right to endanger others lives with such arrogance. Yes people die every day but purposefully telling some one tough sh*t you weren't lucky is clueless. :eyeroll:

 

Quoted for truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the side of your head. You came in here harassing a good standing member, Narps, all over this place, spewing absolute false information - absolute complete lies - saying how the r0 factor was as high as 5, exaggerating every single number you spewed out to create some scare or panic. I presented you with facts and instead of discussing them or debating them, you ran away. Quoted for truth? LMAO. You are pathetic.

 

r0 can be as high as 5. They just don't know yet. But ...that's a lie.

 

I'm still here. Just letting you rant and rave.

 

Call me some more names. Come on - I want you to. 'Pathetic' isn't nasty enough. Let it all out

Yet I have proven to you that it is not 5.0 (or 5.6 which you claimed). It isn't 5.0 or 5.6 or anything close to that. I have proven that to you in link after link. Mathematically it isn't even possible at this point. How can you even claim that still?

 

http://www.therushfo...00#entry4769342

 

Good. If I was wrong about that, then I was wrong.

 

I see reopenings, I see 49 people turning up positive after one night in a bar... Even though some may have been infected, before going in - it's still a high number. So how fast can the thing really spread?

 

I accepted pessimistic estimates early on in the lifecycle, and had a hard time with the perception that some couldn't take the situation as seriously as I felt appropriate. Fear.

 

Frankly, I'm still afraid. Those ICU and morgue videos I saw aren't out of my memory just yet. With the more recent news that even younger people have serious complications, (Decreased lung capacity, athletes now needing dialysis as examples) I till think we need to tread very carefully and take the thing seriously. Even if it 'may not' be killing as many people as the numbers indicate - this thing still isn't your garden variety flu.

 

There you go. Explanations, and no edits.

 

That's fine, but that returns to a point I made a while back. Surely you must agree then that the protests in the wake of George Floyd's death were incredibly irresponsible and dangerous, right? Why did public health officials, not just politicians, either a) disappear from public discourse or b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I don't know that they disappeared. Fauchi and Brix are still with us, and I think they both said that the protests were dangerous in terms of spreading the virus. I think that the media just hasn't been giving them focus, for whatever reason.

 

>>b) suggest that "systemic racism," was a health crisis too so the risk of spreading the virus was worth accepting to protest?

 

I honestly don't understand the second part of your question. Can you rephrase that.

 

I will say that systemic racism is a huge f***ing problem, and I hope that finally change will come. Should have been a long time ago, rather than co-incide with a global pandemic.

 

Sure. Here's an excerpt from what over 1,000 health care professionals said in an open letter:

 

"However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators' ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders."

 

If someone is truly concerned about the risk of the spread of a virus, and is taking a serious position based upon the science, you'd have to agree that why people are gathered in groups is irrelevant to the question of whether that will spread a virus, no?

 

https://www.cnn.com/...trnd/index.html

 

I bolded the key condition of the statement. These professionals are cool with gatherings, so long as everyone is being 'safe'. (Which of course the protesters aren't for the most part).

 

Sure the reasons for gathering are irrelevant in the context of a virus. That's pretty obvious.

 

I don't understand where you're going with the line of questioning.

 

I think it undermines some of the concerns that have been voiced. About a week before Floyd was killed, my cousin's husband died. He was a really good guy (about a decade or so older than I am, I was a young teen when he came into our family, and he was always cool to talk to) and I wish I could have said goodbye to him. They didn't have a wake for him. Only a small number of people could attend the graveside service. Because of restrictions imposed by Governor Baker. A week later thousands of people were in Boston Common, with their masks ridiculously pulled down over their mouths so that they could yell and be heard. So one of two things are true. Either the health care professionals let their political bias influence their statements about the need for social distancing, or they were just wrong about the need for social distancing. Neither is good. Neither instills confidence, from me, in their advice.

 

 

Well, it's just my opinion, but I think the need for social distancing is there. It's the one weapon we do have to slow down the virus, by impeding it's natural path of spread.

 

Enforcing social distancing is probably easier with groups of law abiding and (mostly) complacent and complaint citizens than with a huge group of (justifiably) angry protestors.

 

I can't explain the discrepancy TBH. Because in my opinion every HC professional should be saying that the protestors are at risk of further spread. Becasue at it's core, that's how virus' do spread. From person to person in groups. Even outside....

 

The part I bolded is undoubtedly true. And actually quite troubling for a government of a free society to offer as a justification for its law enforcement decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick update:

 

http://i.imgur.com/f7eGEqB.jpg

 

We should be sneaking in right behind Japanese smallpox not too long from now

By the end of the year it should beat all those 1 million ones.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick update:

 

http://i.imgur.com/f7eGEqB.jpg

 

We should be sneaking in right behind Japanese smallpox not too long from now

By the end of the year it should beat all those 1 million ones.

I'm pretty sure it will be on par with 1957 and 1968, when scaled for population growth.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't want to get into this debate but two things to point out. More people have died from this than the flu kills annually. I have seen wildly exaggerated flu deaths to justify that this isn't bad. the other thing is the long term effects. They are seeing pretty bad lung damage in even the youngest survivors of Covid who didn't even show serious symptoms. Long term this could have serious impact. I don't disagree that there has been serious societal impact by the locking down of the population - I run a business and have felt the economic impact first hand. But this is not just another flu as far as I can tell and I have read a lot.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

January and February: what's happenin in China?

March and April: everyone panics over Covid-19

May: protests

June: racist cops shooting black people and protests

 

What a good first half of 2020 *sarcasm*

Edited by _hi_water._
Link to comment
Share on other sites

January and February: what's happenin in China?

March and April: everyone panics over Covid-19

May: protests

June: racist cops shooting black people and protests

 

What a good first half of 2020 *sarcasm*

 

It's been all down hill since we lost Neil. :(

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...