I think that the media hype (both traditional and social) regarding numbers is extremely misleading.  Yes there may be more positive cases of the Wuhan, China virus because there has been a lot more testing available and done.  As far as the President's comment about "slowing down testing", that was a "tongue in cheek" comment.

"Wuhan, China virus"

Good to see that raging case of delivery boy virus hasn't settled down at all.

---

Your argument doesn't make sense. Even the COVID numbers for the last three weeks are close to the final total except for the last few days where cause of death hasn't always been assigned. The total deaths (what we're looking at) would only change from people being discovered dead in their homes after a few days, which is a very small percentage of deaths. The difference is not going to have a significant effect on the 102%. It's lost in the round-off error.

You call yourself an engineer? I hope I never have to use a product of your analysis.

Thanks for the gratuitous insults!
Why, in your opinion, would there be twice as many deaths reported in the week ending 5/30, compared to the week ending 6/13?

Twice zero is zero, so that statement is meaningless in itself. Do you have a link with numbers?

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Thanks for the gratuitous insults!
Why, in your opinion, would there be twice as many deaths reported in the week ending 5/30, compared to the week ending 6/13?

Twice zero is zero, so that statement is meaningless in itself. Do you have a link with numbers?

You're looking at the wrong column, I guess.  The numbers I see are 53% and 99%, and 99% is about double 53%...

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Twice zero is zero, so that statement is meaningless in itself. Do you have a link with numbers?

You're looking at the wrong column, I guess.  The numbers I see are 53% and 99%, and 99% is about double 53%...

I see what you are referring to. I shouldn't have assumed that government used common sense by counting a person who died as dead, rather than waiting for death certificates. However, the lag in deaths from all causes would have to be entirely from Wuhan virus in order to make up the difference between the claimed number of Wuhan virus deaths vs. the difference between the 2020 total and the "expected deaths."

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Ever since George Floyd dies of Coronavirus the world has been on fire.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I guess the markets are shifting based on people caring about COVID-19 again. It is fascinating how the MSM narrative controls financial markets.

---

I guess the markets are shifting based on people caring about COVID-19 again. It is fascinating how the MSM narrative controls financial markets.

Not really.  End of month and more specifically end of quarter coming up.  Most investors are re-balancing and shifting investments.  I did so a couple of days ago with selling a few stocks to secure profit and buying the dip today.  The China virus won't really impact the markets that much unless we see a bunch of major shutdowns again.

While reported positive cases might be up in the state, there is certainly no spike in hospitalizations, people on ventilators, etc..

It would be interesting to see how many new "positive" cases are people that are asymptomatic.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

I guess the markets are shifting based on people caring about COVID-19 again. It is fascinating how the MSM narrative controls financial markets.

Not really.  End of month and more specifically end of quarter coming up.  Most investors are re-balancing and shifting investments.  I did so a couple of days ago with selling a few stocks to secure profit and buying the dip today.  The China virus won't really impact the markets that much unless we see a bunch of major shutdowns again.

While reported positive cases might be up in the state, there is certainly no spike in hospitalizations, people on ventilators, etc..

It would be interesting to see how many new "positive" cases are people that are asymptomatic.

And retesting the same people.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/12759...18948?s=19

---

https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/12759...18948?s=19

It’s okay, suge, we’ll be fine.

---

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/12759...09920?s=19

---

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/12759...09920?s=19

Planning? Sounds like open ended jargon for easy page 10 retraction.

---

I love how the board Leftists and the foreign USA haters turn a worldwide disaster into Trump or USA hate.

In any case, there's more actual news on the virus itself. Apparently many people who are exposed to the virus will overcome it without creating antibodies.

Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 can induce virus-specific T cell responses without seroconversion. T cell responses may be more sensitive indicators of SARS-Co-V-2 exposure than antibodies. Our results indicate that epidemiological data relying only on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies may lead to a substantial underestimation of prior exposure to the virus

Link

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolen...fe4f135fac

Definitely joking, right?

---

https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/127...82368?s=19

---

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolen...fe4f135fac

Definitely joking, right?

He said he wasn't joking.

---

This doesn't surprise me. I would need to look at that graph and the information sources more closely, but this was an inevitable problem with handling the virus nationally. I don't think we should have closed the whole country down at once, because I am pretty sure the virus didn't get a chance to spread everywhere. It was almost inevitable that unless the virus was eradicated, it would continue to spread once lockdown ended. I don't know why people can't wrap their head around the actual size of the US. We are a giant country geographically and also have a huge population.

Hindsight is 20/20, but we should have never shut down the economy nationally (or did it only until testing was readily available). Only the people most at risk should have been self-quarantined, which in this case was the elderly and immunocompromised. People should have worn masks and social distanced to limit the spread to help flatten the curve, and states should have entered lockdown on an individual basis, if and only if R > 1. I think some business could have been shut down like bars, entertainment, and theme parks. This would have allowed the virus to distribute more evenly around the US and cause our curve to look more like other nations. I advocated for most of these restrictions early on, and based it off the S. Korea and Thailand models. However, I think the US is too big to follow their lead for the reason mentioned above.

I also don't understand how people came to believe that we need a vaccine to beat this virus. It would be awesome if that's how medicine worked, but it's not. Waiting in your house for a vaccine is unsustainable.

---

This doesn't surprise me. I would need to look at that graph and the information sources more closely, but this was an inevitable problem with handling the virus nationally. I don't think we should have closed the whole country down at once, because I am pretty sure the virus didn't get a chance to spread everywhere. It was almost inevitable that unless the virus was eradicated, it would continue to spread once lockdown ended. I don't know why people can't wrap their head around the actual size of the US. We are a giant country geographically and also have a huge population.

Hindsight is 20/20, but we should have never shut down the economy nationally (or did  it only until testing was readily available). Only the people most at risk should have been self-quarantined, which in this case was the elderly and immunocompromised. People should have worn masks and social distanced to limit the spread to help flatten the curve, and states should have entered lockdown on an individual basis, if and only if R > 1. I think some business could have been shut down like bars, entertainment, and theme parks. This would have allowed the virus to distribute more evenly around the US and cause our curve to look more like other nations. I advocated for most of these restrictions early on, and based it off the S. Korea and Thailand models. However, I think the US is too big to follow their lead for the reason mentioned above.  

I also don't understand how people came to believe that we need a vaccine to beat this virus. It would be awesome if that's how medicine worked, but it's not. Waiting in your house for a vaccine is unsustainable.

The main problem is the false reporting that contracting the virus is a death sentence. People are being terrorized for no reason except that fear begats control.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Huh.... where have I seen that before?

---

Huh.... where have I seen that before?

My posts since about St Patrick's Day? 

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato