Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The context is that according to the CDC's confirmed numbers this isn't spreading like some would have us believe. It's also not that deadly to the vast majority of the population. I'm not sure where you're getting your 1.5 million deaths in the US or what time line you're using to reach that number, but so far it doesn't seem to be trending that way. Can you show a source of your number?
.0479% (your number) X 330,000,000 = 158,070, to be exact. That's now.
Redfield says ten times that. There's your million and a half. I'm not using any timeline at all, I don't guess at these things.
It's spreading exactly as the numbers say it is spreading. Let's hope that whether through the development of a vaccine or a sudden emergence of contagious common sense that growth is short circuited.
.0479% (your number) X 330,000,000 = 158,070, to be exact. That's now.
Redfield says ten times that. There's your million and a half. I'm not using any timeline at all, I don't guess at these things.
It's spreading exactly as the numbers say it is spreading. Let's hope that whether through the development of a vaccine or a sudden emergence of contagious common sense that growth is short circuited.
No Redfield is estimating 10 times, he, like everyone else keeping the panic levels high doesn’t know. And even if Redfield is correct that means that we are not seeing deaths in the numbers that would reflect that, even with counting deaths where a person died from something else as a Corvid death even if they only had it and didn’t kill them, and maybe if they had it.
No Redfield is estimating 10 times, he, like everyone else keeping the panic levels high doesn’t know.
How is the 10x estimate "keeping the panic levels high"? If you actually think about it for a second, it implies that the actual number of infections is far greater than the number of confirmed cases, which should reduce the panic level for at least two reasons:
many of the infections are either asymptomatic or not severe enough to warrant hospitalization
more infections gets us closer to everybody's favorite 2020 meme of "herd immunity"
It seems that you can't even recognize when something is "good news."
How is the 10x estimate "keeping the panic levels high"? If you actually think about it for a second, it implies that the actual number of infections is far greater than the number of confirmed cases, which should reduce the panic level for at least two reasons:
many of the infections are either asymptomatic or not severe enough to warrant hospitalization
more infections gets us closer to everybody's favorite 2020 meme of "herd immunity"
It seems that you can't even recognize when something is "good news."
And it seems that you don't really read responses. Check my previous response to you.
"Actually if you go with the CDC estimate that 10 times more people had it you get 0.33%, so even less deaths among the infected."
What I recognize is that we are being hit with numbers that are essentially being pulled out of the air. An estimate is just that, an estimate, and not worth as much without a CI or how the 10 times number was reached.
The idea that more people have had it and didn't die, didn't need hospitalization and in some cases didn't even know they had it should point to a relaxing of lock downs. But... we're getting the opposite story from the media where they use each spike as a reason to cue the ominous music and start talking about deaths being a lagging indicator.
FWIW I'm not counting on herd immunity or a vaccine, I'm just out living my life.
And it seems that you don't really read responses. Check my previous response to you.
"Actually if you go with the CDC estimate that 10 times more people had it you get 0.33%, so even less deaths among the infected."
What I recognize is that we are being hit with numbers that are essentially being pulled out of the air. An estimate is just that, an estimate, and not worth as much without a CI or how the 10 times number was reached.
The idea that more people have had it and didn't die, didn't need hospitalization and in some cases didn't even know they had it should point to a relaxing of lock downs. But... we're getting the opposite story from the media where they use each spike as a reason to cue the ominous music and start talking about deaths being a lagging indicator.
FWIW I'm not counting on herd immunity or a vaccine, I'm just out living my life.
Whenever some media/Dem (but I repeat myself) dingbat explains that, I always imagine he/she is from a different planet and has only recently realized that on planet earth death comes after illness (and not the other way around). And he/she does not realize we already know that.
Beyond that the media/Dems (but I repeat myself) seem almost disappointed that the deaths are not coming at the same rate in Florida as they did in New York so they're trying to whip up the woke-panic by focusing on cases (New York, BTW has fewer people and is younger):
No Redfield is estimating 10 times, he, like everyone else keeping the panic levels high doesn’t know. And even if Redfield is correct that means that we are not seeing deaths in the numbers that would reflect that, even with counting deaths where a person died from something else as a Corvid death even if they only had it and didn’t kill them, and maybe if they had it.
I thought we hit too many deaths months ago. You sound like you're okay at today's level; when does the number become too high for you to accept as the "cost of doing business?"
I thought we hit too many deaths months ago. You sound like you're okay at today's level; when does the number become too high for you to accept as the "cost of doing business?"
Personally I wouldn't mind seeing these trends continue:
I thought we hit too many deaths months ago. You sound like you're okay at today's level; when does the number become too high for you to accept as the "cost of doing business?"
Considering we're below the 2017-2018 flu season where nothing was shut down, and the trend is down, then I'm good to go right now.
In you mind how many was too many? When does it become just right for you?
So, that should mean close to 300,000 dead by the end of the year. For how many years would you be fine with that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
