Coronavirus, Round 2: This Virus Doesn't Give a $hit about You!

[Nobert]

It just sounded funny, that's all.Placing yourself in the same lineup implies equivalency, at least the way you said it. For example, one could have said "Both Moses and Jesus said to love each other, I agree with that" but if someone instead says "Moses, Jesus and I all say to love each other" it puts them in the same cohort as Jesus and Moses.

It does sounds like that.
And it takes a low level of abstract thinking, to understand that which was written - between the lines.
Basic/mediocre iq tests, can be applied by the usage of abstract thinking alone. Fascinating. Skills in any school out there - are irrelevant.
(maybe all of the difficulty levels not sure tho)

Thus :
#1. It did sounded funny to you, while you couldn't grasp the true meaning of what i said.
#2. You understood it right - but said that it's funny - & in that case - it's a passive aggression in words. Not good, not good at all.

Whenever celebrities express their views, it's less about their actual opinions and more about their book. Musk wants the economy open because he needs to make cars etc.

But since we're on the topic of fortunes and biases, we can discuss it too. IMHO, most of the ultra rich have made their fortunes via sheer luck that was marginally supplemented by hard work and good decision-making. The amount of random events required for someone to make it to the far left tail of the distribution is staggering. Sometimes you can trace their success to a single event, like inheriting a fortune or have his parents make the right introduction. Sometimes it's several less obvious events which are equally pivotal.

When someone failed upward multuple times it's not surprising that they have massive blind spots or judgement impairments. In fact, many successful people are frequently the most biased because their success (if it works, don't fuck with it approach) prevents them from considering other opinions.

I see.
What about the data, which shows that 99.3% of the dead/victims, had the underlying conditions.
What do you think about that ?

 

[Ethilaloth]

After the quarantine had weakened, mankind started making up for lost time: buying plane tickets, going to cafes, dropping extra pounds in gyms and choosing clothes in shopping malls. However, this behaviour didn't last long in some countries. There was a sharp increase in the number of infected people, and doctors started talking about a second wave of coronavirus, and the authorities returned the restrictions.
Officially, only Israel has spoken of the second wave so far. Both there and some other countries are imposing stricter restrictions in certain regions or cities.
The complete and early lifting of security measures threatens to bring the pandemic back out of control.
In Britain, therefore, quarantine is being loosened in stages and control measures are being introduced - wearing masks and tracking contacts of infected people.
New outbreaks can occur very quickly if quarantine is removed to a level where further spread can't be controlled. The problem will not grow if authorities quickly detect hot spots of infection and prevent the virus from spreading further.
In the absence of a rapid response, however, such outbreaks may cause a second wave.
At the beginning of the lockdown, World Health Organisation noted that quarantine wouldn't stop a pandemic, but would only buy time that governments should use effectively to develop health systems and find a vaccine.

 

[Sig]

It just sounded funny, that's all.Placing yourself in the same lineup implies equivalency, at least the way you said it. For example, one could have said "Both Moses and Jesus said to love each other, I agree with that" but if someone instead says "Moses, Jesus and I all say to love each other" it puts them in the same cohort as Jesus and Moses.


Whenever celebrities express their views, it's less about their actual opinions and more about their book. Musk wants the economy open because he needs to make cars etc.

But since we're on the topic of fortunes and biases, we can discuss it too. IMHO, most of the ultra rich have made their fortunes via sheer luck that was marginally supplemented by hard work and good decision-making. The amount of random events required for someone to make it to the far left tail of the distribution is staggering. Sometimes you can trace their success to a single event, like inheriting a fortune or have his parents make the right introduction. Sometimes it's several less obvious events which are equally pivotal.

When someone failed upward multuple times it's not surprising that they have massive blind spots or judgement impairments. In fact, many successful people are frequently the most biased because their success (if it works, don't fuck with it approach) prevents them from considering other opinions.

The fundamental attribution error is eye opening when you realize it's breadth and impact on both sides of the curve.

 

[Same Lazy Element]

#1. It did sounded funny to you, while you couldn't grasp the true meaning of what i said.
#2. You understood it right - but said that it's funny - & in that case - it's a passive aggression in words. Not good, not good at all.

#1, of course. I am not intelligent enough to pick up on the great nuances in your reasoning.

What about the data, which shows that 99.3% of the dead/victims, had the underlying conditions.

I linked the NYC age-bucketed co-morbidity data in the second post, it's a very important bit of data.

What do you think about that ?

First of all, even if all deaths were due to preexisting conditions, it still is a very serious thing. In the New York City (where the infection rates has flattened out) mortality rate is up massively. We are talking about anywhere from 30% increase to double (sic!) the number of regular deaths in 2020. Indeed, the co-morbidity data suggests that anywhere from 88% to 99% of these deaths were in patients with preexisting conditions. We live in a society where 30% of the population is morbidly obese, 10% has diabetes, about 7% has coronary artery disease etc.

Second of all, the sheer fact that we are arguing about this in the face of 140 thousand dead (and the pandemic is in it's early stages, see NYC to more of "post-sombrero" understanding of the data) is very telling. We, as a society, should be aggressively working on a model where we can protect the vulnerable while keeping the economy going. Instead, we are bickering about the severity of the ongoing pandemic, bitching about the masks, arguing about the death attribution and so on.

Finally, this is less about the pre-existing conditions and more about the age group. Literally everything in the pandemic response has been about protecting the 55+ population and fucking over the younger generations (from younger gen-Xers and below). It's especially true in the US.

 

[marketcentral]

There was no second wave,,,there was no pause in the spread, it just keeps growing and growing 10% of the country is infected. it still the first wave.

like this market there not even retracement. or pullback. since march 23.. v-shape recovery. on the monthly charts, every month it is higher. and any selling the gov't algos start buying.

 

[BAT31]

Ten percent of 350 million is what? It's far more than 3.8 million that are infected.

 

[Nobert]

I linked the NYC age-bucketed co-morbidity data in the second post, it's a very important bit of data.

C'mon element, you can do better than that, since the data is in numbers and not %.

140 k dead old people with UC.

(Laughs, looks down & shakes head)
What we are talking about.

First of all, even if all deaths were due to preexisting conditions, it still is a very serious thing. In the New York City (where the infection rates has flattened out) mortality rate is up massively. We are talking about anywhere from 30% increase to double (sic!) the number of regular deaths in 2020. Indeed, the co-morbidity data suggests that anywhere from 88% to 99% of these deaths were in patients with preexisting conditions. We live in a society where 30% of the population is morbidly obese, 10% has diabetes, about 7% has coronary artery disease etc.

I read it for few times and the only rational explanation i come with - you were all indoctrinated with fear. Because emotion takes over, folks fail to take both scenarios into calculations & portray the future only via the possible negative outcome, while neglacting the potential, ,,positive" data e.g that the infection might be 200% - 300% larger.

Anyway, then fear it is :

 

[Same Lazy Element]

I read it for few times and the only rational explanation i come with - you were all indoctrinated with fear. Because emotion takes over, folks fail to take both scenarios into calculations & portray the future only via the possible negative outcome, while neglacting the potential, ,,positive" data e.g that the infection might be 200% - 300% larger.

Dude, you are rambling and I am not sure what you are trying to say. I am simply taking about OVERALL death rate, look at the NYC data and make your own conclusions. Population of the NYC is 9 million, baseline death rate is 700 (per hundred thousand), so anywhere from 60 to 70 thousand deaths per year. We just had 20-25k excess deaths from COVID-19 in the span of 6 months. If we take the upper estimate for baseline deaths and lower estimate for coronavirus deaths (i.e. 70k and 20k respectively) and assume no more deaths from COVID-19 this year, we have a 30% increase in mortality for 2020. If we assume another wave of similar magnitude in the fall, we are looking at roughly double the regular mortality (40-50 thousand excess deaths). If you do not consider this a serious problem, then we got nothing to discuss.

With regards to fear, of course I am afraid. Probability of me dying is low, I am probably in top 1-2% of the US in terms of cardiovascular health and physical conditioning etc. But it would suck to get sick and suffer potential side effects. Heck, just the recovery would suck - some people take three to six months to get back to normal. Even if I don't get sick, I have enough friends among the vulnerable population to care about the broad outcome. Finally, a 10-20% increase in mortality will come with massive long-term economic consequences, which will impact me indirectly.

 

[Nobert]

look at the NYC data and make your own conclusions.

Well i made those some time ago :

We live in a society where 30% of the population is morbidly obese, 10% has diabetes, about 7% has coronary artery disease etc....
If we assume another wave of similar magnitude in the fall.....
looking at roughly double the regular mortality (40-50 thousand excess deaths).....
it would suck to get sick and suffer potential side effects. Heck, just the recovery would suck - some people take three to six months to get back to normal. ....
a 10-20% increase in mortality will come with massive long-term economic consequences

Ever heard of predictions and how much of value have those ?

Apparently, in post #348 - the person that i quoted - haven't.
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/sweden.343088/page-35

Like i came back to him, after few months, so shall i meet you - with all of your doomsday's predictions in few months.
But until then, keep your spine strong.

timestamped :

p.s -

If you believe in afterlife, that's you and me :
(both in 1% by fitness, both gets busted by a flu. Word)

 

[Sig]

Well i made those some time ago :
View attachment 235514




Ever heard of predictions and how much of value have those ?

Apparently, in post #348 - the person that i quoted - haven't.
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/sweden.343088/page-35

Like i came back to him, after few months, so shall i meet you - with all of your doomsday's predictions in few months.
But until then, keep your spine strong.

timestamped :

This whole "we don't have to worry about this because only people with underlying conditions die of it" thing is absolute bullshit and I'd like to put it to bed once and for all. First of all, almost every American has an "underlying condition". About 40% of Americans are obese, that's an "underlying condition". About 15% of Americans smoke, that's an "underlying condition". About 15% of Americans are over 65, also an "underlying condition" for COVID. We could go on and on, but at the end of the day nearly every American has an "underlying condition" for COVID, and the majority of those who don't are kids who aren't very susceptible anyway. So at the end of the day, there are hardly any adult Americans without an "underlying condition" so of course not very many "without underlying conditions" will die of COVID, that's just basic stats. And therefore it's a completely meaningless number.

That's before you talk about the ethics of deciding that it's just fine if 140,000 people die as long as they were all obese, had diabetes, were over 65, had asthma.....that's alone is appalling. So please, just stop talking about this "underlying condition" thing like it somehow makes everything OK. Continuing to do so just paints one as both intellectually and emotionally lacking.