[akiddoc]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/24/los-ange...virus.html

No details, not even the age.

Addendum: Newsom says it was a teenager.

[akiddoc]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/24/los-ange...virus.html

No details, not even the age.

Addendum: Newsom says it was a teenager.

[BostonCard]

When the denominator gets large enough, eventually you will see patients who are otherwise "low risk" dying.  That's why the Texas governor's comments made no sense.  Setting aside whether it is ethical to sacrifice grandma for the economy, it's not even an accurate assessment because if you infect millions upon millions of people, even with a mortality rate of 0.1% in younger age groups, that's thousands of young people dying too.

BC

[BostonCard]

When the denominator gets large enough, eventually you will see patients who are otherwise "low risk" dying.  That's why the Texas governor's comments made no sense.  Setting aside whether it is ethical to sacrifice grandma for the economy, it's not even an accurate assessment because if you infect millions upon millions of people, even with a mortality rate of 0.1% in younger age groups, that's thousands of young people dying too.

BC

[Mick]

When the denominator gets large enough, eventually you will see patients who are otherwise "low risk" dying.  That's why the Texas governor's comments made no sense.  Setting aside whether it is ethical to sacrifice grandma for the economy, it's not even an accurate assessment because if you infect millions upon millions of people, even with a mortality rate of 0.1% in younger age groups, that's thousands of young people dying too.

BC

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[Mick]

When the denominator gets large enough, eventually you will see patients who are otherwise "low risk" dying.  That's why the Texas governor's comments made no sense.  Setting aside whether it is ethical to sacrifice grandma for the economy, it's not even an accurate assessment because if you infect millions upon millions of people, even with a mortality rate of 0.1% in younger age groups, that's thousands of young people dying too.

BC

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[2006alum]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

[2006alum]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

[Mick]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

Current # of deaths, 782.
Estimate cited in your copied tweet, 3 million to 7 million.  

How about eleventy million?  Care to pick another number from thin air?

[Mick]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

Current # of deaths, 782.
Estimate cited in your copied tweet, 3 million to 7 million.  

How about eleventy million?  Care to pick another number from thin air?

[2006alum]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

CDC e

Current # of deaths, 782.
Estimate cited in your copied tweet, 3 million to 7 million.  

How about eleventy million?  Care to pick another number from thin air?

CDC estimate without social distancing and other aggressive measures is 2.2 million. And driving cars at least gets us someplace. Saving an incumbent's reelection bid is something of a bridge to nowhere.

[2006alum]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

CDC e

Current # of deaths, 782.
Estimate cited in your copied tweet, 3 million to 7 million.  

How about eleventy million?  Care to pick another number from thin air?

CDC estimate without social distancing and other aggressive measures is 2.2 million. And driving cars at least gets us someplace. Saving an incumbent's reelection bid is something of a bridge to nowhere.

[Mick]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

CDC e

Current # of deaths, 782.
Estimate cited in your copied tweet, 3 million to 7 million.  

How about eleventy million?  Care to pick another number from thin air?

CDC estimate without social distancing and other aggressive measures is 2.2 million. And driving cars at least gets us someplace. Saving an incumbent's reelection bid is something of a bridge to nowhere.

So by logical extension of your argument, forced shelter in place gets us to full employment?  No economic crisis?

[Mick]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

CDC e

Current # of deaths, 782.
Estimate cited in your copied tweet, 3 million to 7 million.  

How about eleventy million?  Care to pick another number from thin air?

CDC estimate without social distancing and other aggressive measures is 2.2 million. And driving cars at least gets us someplace. Saving an incumbent's reelection bid is something of a bridge to nowhere.

So by logical extension of your argument, forced shelter in place gets us to full employment?  No economic crisis?

[BostonCard]

How many deaths occur is less relevant than how many avoidable deaths occur.  We mandate car seats for young kids for a reason; they reduce the mortality of car accidents by 71%.  Someone might object to the cost or the inconvenience, but they are still mandated because doing so prevented 12,000 kids’ deaths.

OSHA, EPA, etc, all mandate costly regulations to save lives. Environmental, health, and safety regulations cost $700,000 to $900,000 per life saved. None of us know how many deaths this thing will cause.  Even on the lower end of the range (thousands of deaths), we are talking about a cost in life alone of billions of dollars.  On the high end of things (millions of deaths), we are talking about a cost in life alone of trillions of dollars.

Not to mention the fact that as bodies start accumulating, at some point it doesn’t matter what you allow, people are not going to pretend the virus isn’t out there and go back to the status quo ante.

BC

[BostonCard]

How many deaths occur is less relevant than how many avoidable deaths occur.  We mandate car seats for young kids for a reason; they reduce the mortality of car accidents by 71%.  Someone might object to the cost or the inconvenience, but they are still mandated because doing so prevented 12,000 kids’ deaths.

OSHA, EPA, etc, all mandate costly regulations to save lives. Environmental, health, and safety regulations cost $700,000 to $900,000 per life saved. None of us know how many deaths this thing will cause.  Even on the lower end of the range (thousands of deaths), we are talking about a cost in life alone of billions of dollars.  On the high end of things (millions of deaths), we are talking about a cost in life alone of trillions of dollars.

Not to mention the fact that as bodies start accumulating, at some point it doesn’t matter what you allow, people are not going to pretend the virus isn’t out there and go back to the status quo ante.

BC

[cardcrimson]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

CDC e

Current # of deaths, 782.
Estimate cited in your copied tweet, 3 million to 7 million.  

How about eleventy million?  Care to pick another number from thin air?

CDC estimate without social distancing and other aggressive measures is 2.2 million. And driving cars at least gets us someplace. Saving an incumbent's reelection bid is something of a bridge to nowhere.

I'm perplexed. You're citing the CDC as a reliable and accurate source on the coronavirus? I thought the organization was so decimated by Trump's cuts they couldn't do anything. . . .

[cardcrimson]

Exactly.  About 2,000 children under the age of 16 died in car crashes every year.  Terrible.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1242506339156471814?s=20[/tweet]

CDC e

Current # of deaths, 782.
Estimate cited in your copied tweet, 3 million to 7 million.  

How about eleventy million?  Care to pick another number from thin air?

CDC estimate without social distancing and other aggressive measures is 2.2 million. And driving cars at least gets us someplace. Saving an incumbent's reelection bid is something of a bridge to nowhere.

I'm perplexed. You're citing the CDC as a reliable and accurate source on the coronavirus? I thought the organization was so decimated by Trump's cuts they couldn't do anything. . . .

[2006alum]

Not to mention the fact that as bodies start accumulating, at some point it doesn’t matter what you allow, people are not going to pretend the virus isn’t out there and go back to the status quo ante.

This, times 1000. Until we get widespread testing, an antibody test, and contact tracing and isolation measures implemented, I suspect folks like Outsider Fan and I will be in our bunkers for months no matter what Our Elected Leader tells us to do on Easter Rising.

[2006alum]

Not to mention the fact that as bodies start accumulating, at some point it doesn’t matter what you allow, people are not going to pretend the virus isn’t out there and go back to the status quo ante.

This, times 1000. Until we get widespread testing, an antibody test, and contact tracing and isolation measures implemented, I suspect folks like Outsider Fan and I will be in our bunkers for months no matter what Our Elected Leader tells us to do on Easter Rising.

[OutsiderFan]

Believe it or not, some things have absolutely nothing to do with the current POTUS. Like, for example, this CDC report released in 2007 that assesses how to deal with pandemics and what their outcomes projected to be at the time. I suggest reading Page 10 and 11.

https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/11425

It's probably a fairly accurate assumption that the CDC data given to Congress is based on this report. What's amazing, is even the Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) outlined  over a decade ago don't call for a mandatory stay at home order. They only went to voluntary. This probably means the CDC assessment's worst case scenario wasn't for something as bad as the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

[OutsiderFan]

Believe it or not, some things have absolutely nothing to do with the current POTUS. Like, for example, this CDC report released in 2007 that assesses how to deal with pandemics and what their outcomes projected to be at the time. I suggest reading Page 10 and 11.

https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/11425

It's probably a fairly accurate assumption that the CDC data given to Congress is based on this report. What's amazing, is even the Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) outlined  over a decade ago don't call for a mandatory stay at home order. They only went to voluntary. This probably means the CDC assessment's worst case scenario wasn't for something as bad as the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

[Goose]

Believe it or not, some things have absolutely nothing to do with the current POTUS. Like, for example, this CDC report released in 2007 that assesses how to deal with pandemics and what their outcomes projected to be at the time. I suggest reading Page 10 and 11.



https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/11425



It's probably a fairly accurate assumption that the CDC data given to Congress is based on this report. What's amazing, is even the Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) outlined  over a decade ago don't call for a mandatory stay at home order. They only went to voluntary. This probably means the CDC assessment's worst case scenario wasn't for something as bad as the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

That probability is made even higher by the title of the document:
Interim Pre-pandemic Planning Guidance Community Strategy for Pandemic Influenza. Note the word Influenza. Note also that this document has been superseded by another, similar one on influenza. For sure a different beast.

[Goose]

Believe it or not, some things have absolutely nothing to do with the current POTUS. Like, for example, this CDC report released in 2007 that assesses how to deal with pandemics and what their outcomes projected to be at the time. I suggest reading Page 10 and 11.



https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/11425



It's probably a fairly accurate assumption that the CDC data given to Congress is based on this report. What's amazing, is even the Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) outlined  over a decade ago don't call for a mandatory stay at home order. They only went to voluntary. This probably means the CDC assessment's worst case scenario wasn't for something as bad as the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

That probability is made even higher by the title of the document:
Interim Pre-pandemic Planning Guidance Community Strategy for Pandemic Influenza. Note the word Influenza. Note also that this document has been superseded by another, similar one on influenza. For sure a different beast.