Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: FROM THE RED ZONE

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: FROM THE RED ZONE Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/18/2020 10:34:25 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 5188
Joined: 11/16/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Today's worldwide figures:

Total Cases: 213557
Total Recovered: 84317
Total Deaths: 8790

Death Rate: 8790 / (8790 + 84317) = 9.4%

That's up from 8.5% yesterday.

Note that the above figures are all we have to work with. If you don't like the results you can:

1. Manipulate the data. That means cherry-picking the data you like and ignoring the data you don't like. That's an obvious vector for bias.
2. Speculate about unknowns. That seems to be the balm most of you are turning to (especially for the recoveries - not the deaths). But this will only result in a guess and everyone's guess will vary wildly. (And deaths are unknown as well - victims that died at home alone may not be found for months, and N. Korea's and Iran's numbers are suspect).
3. Cram the unresolved cases into the "recovered" column. Obviously wrong.
4. Wait months for a fully accurate accounting. We can't do that. We need the best estimate NOW.

The figure above is the only one we have that is available NOW, and has no data MANIPULATION or SPECULATION.

Let me know when your number reaches 100%. At that point I will go to all the active cases and let them know they have to die to support your logic.


Especially if he were to catch it. Then, if it is not allowed where he lives, he could relocate to someplace where assisted suicide is legal.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 601
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/18/2020 11:47:03 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 5188
Joined: 11/16/2015
Status: offline
People with blood type A may be more susceptible to coronavirus

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-pandemic-blood-type-susceptible-infection-china-study-a9409331.html

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 602
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 2:21:18 AM   
Lobster


Posts: 3786
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Today's worldwide figures:

Total Cases: 213557
Total Recovered: 84317
Total Deaths: 8790

Death Rate: 8790 / (8790 + 84317) = 9.4%

That's up from 8.5% yesterday.

Note that the above figures are all we have to work with. If you don't like the results you can:

1. Manipulate the data. That means cherry-picking the data you like and ignoring the data you don't like. That's an obvious vector for bias.
2. Speculate about unknowns. That seems to be the balm most of you are turning to (especially for the recoveries - not the deaths). But this will only result in a guess and everyone's guess will vary wildly. (And deaths are unknown as well - victims that died at home alone may not be found for months, and N. Korea's and Iran's numbers are suspect).
3. Cram the unresolved cases into the "recovered" column. Obviously wrong.
4. Wait months for a fully accurate accounting. We can't do that. We need the best estimate NOW.

The figure above is the only one we have that is available NOW, and has no data MANIPULATION or SPECULATION.

Let me know when your number reaches 100%. At that point I will go to all the active cases and let them know they have to die to support your logic.


Especially if he were to catch it. Then, if it is not allowed where he lives, he could relocate to someplace where assisted suicide is legal.


https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Note the numbers on the right.

_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 603
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 2:46:39 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 5188
Joined: 11/16/2015
Status: offline
Does that information include the cases where people got sick from the virus but it was not reported as such? That number should be included.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 604
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 4:54:30 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41726
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Today's worldwide figures:

Total Cases: 213557
Total Recovered: 84317
Total Deaths: 8790

Death Rate: 8790 / (8790 + 84317) = 9.4%

That's up from 8.5% yesterday.

Note that the above figures are all we have to work with. If you don't like the results you can:

1. Manipulate the data. That means cherry-picking the data you like and ignoring the data you don't like. That's an obvious vector for bias.
2. Speculate about unknowns. That seems to be the balm most of you are turning to (especially for the recoveries - not the deaths). But this will only result in a guess and everyone's guess will vary wildly. (And deaths are unknown as well - victims that died at home alone may not be found for months, and N. Korea's and Iran's numbers are suspect).
3. Cram the unresolved cases into the "recovered" column. Obviously wrong.
4. Wait months for a fully accurate accounting. We can't do that. We need the best estimate NOW.

The figure above is the only one we have that is available NOW, and has no data MANIPULATION or SPECULATION.

Let me know when your number reaches 100%. At that point I will go to all the active cases and let them know they have to die to support your logic.


Especially if he were to catch it. Then, if it is not allowed where he lives, he could relocate to someplace where assisted suicide is legal.
warspite1

Zorch, RangerJoe I really wouldn't bother. He's clearly enjoying his five minutes of fame and appears to be getting off on the numbers rising higher. He knows that if this thing does prove worse than we are currently being led to believe then he can be the all knowing sage - and if in time the numbers prove to be lower, then he can use his 'mathematical formula' as his defence. I note he hasn't broken his numbers down by country - after all that would expose the absurdity of his 'methodology'. You mention 100% Zorch, but the US is around 50% death rate (according to him) so instead of telling the active cases in the US they have to die, just tell them they need to flip one of those coins he keeps banging on about before knowing what is the appropriate course of action for them to take.

One thing that is clear is that he isn't going to stop, he's on a roll and loving it. So in responding we are just going to get the same thing everyday; The poor man's grim reaper pipes up with his daily shock headline based on selected, cherry-picked data for maximum effect, then calmer, more measured heads take exception, and others get angry that the same conversations are being had.

So perhaps the "ignore him and he'll go away approach" is best?


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 605
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 7:04:00 AM   
rico21

 

Posts: 2763
Joined: 3/11/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Today's worldwide figures:

Total Cases: 213557
Total Recovered: 84317
Total Deaths: 8790

Death Rate: 8790 / (8790 + 84317) = 9.4%

That's up from 8.5% yesterday.

Note that the above figures are all we have to work with. If you don't like the results you can:

1. Manipulate the data. That means cherry-picking the data you like and ignoring the data you don't like. That's an obvious vector for bias.
2. Speculate about unknowns. That seems to be the balm most of you are turning to (especially for the recoveries - not the deaths). But this will only result in a guess and everyone's guess will vary wildly. (And deaths are unknown as well - victims that died at home alone may not be found for months, and N. Korea's and Iran's numbers are suspect).
3. Cram the unresolved cases into the "recovered" column. Obviously wrong.
4. Wait months for a fully accurate accounting. We can't do that. We need the best estimate NOW.

The figure above is the only one we have that is available NOW, and has no data MANIPULATION or SPECULATION.

I agree that 10% of the 20% who have severe complications die.
That is to say,
About 2% of the more or less declared contaminated.
About 1% of all infected.
About 0.5% of the global population.
About 10 to 20 times, more than the flu.
All this over the entire duration of the epidemic.
My calculation method is simple;
I compile all the information, I analyze, I calculate, I post.
A little like you.
Cheers.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 606
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 9:05:33 AM   
loki100


Posts: 6257
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


...

So perhaps the "ignore him and he'll go away approach" is best?



agree, every now and then he seems to delight in sticking to this sort of banal idiocy. He's clearly too intelligent to believe in what he is saying, so its trolling.

I'm on a notice board used by social statisticians and of course that includes experts in interpreting health statistics. In this context, the only honest answers are 'we don't know' around mortality/infection rate etc. I could cross post some of it but mostly its someone trying out a methcdology and asking for advice both as to the approach and the conclusions they are trying to draw.

_____________________________


(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 607
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 10:09:28 AM   
Pvt_Grunt

 

Posts: 293
Joined: 2/13/2007
From: Frankston Victoria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

So this is the first day of working from home while my little warspites are still at Uni/School and Mrs W is at work. Weird.


I believe they are called "Destroyers"

_____________________________


(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 608
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 10:22:03 AM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7235
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Today's worldwide figures:

Total Cases: 213557
Total Recovered: 84317
Total Deaths: 8790

Death Rate: 8790 / (8790 + 84317) = 9.4%

That's up from 8.5% yesterday.

Note that the above figures are all we have to work with. If you don't like the results you can:

1. Manipulate the data. That means cherry-picking the data you like and ignoring the data you don't like. That's an obvious vector for bias.
2. Speculate about unknowns. That seems to be the balm most of you are turning to (especially for the recoveries - not the deaths). But this will only result in a guess and everyone's guess will vary wildly. (And deaths are unknown as well - victims that died at home alone may not be found for months, and N. Korea's and Iran's numbers are suspect).
3. Cram the unresolved cases into the "recovered" column. Obviously wrong.
4. Wait months for a fully accurate accounting. We can't do that. We need the best estimate NOW.

The figure above is the only one we have that is available NOW, and has no data MANIPULATION or SPECULATION.

Let me know when your number reaches 100%. At that point I will go to all the active cases and let them know they have to die to support your logic.


Especially if he were to catch it. Then, if it is not allowed where he lives, he could relocate to someplace where assisted suicide is legal.
warspite1

Zorch, RangerJoe I really wouldn't bother. He's clearly enjoying his five minutes of fame and appears to be getting off on the numbers rising higher. He knows that if this thing does prove worse than we are currently being led to believe then he can be the all knowing sage - and if in time the numbers prove to be lower, then he can use his 'mathematical formula' as his defence. I note he hasn't broken his numbers down by country - after all that would expose the absurdity of his 'methodology'. You mention 100% Zorch, but the US is around 50% death rate (according to him) so instead of telling the active cases in the US they have to die, just tell them they need to flip one of those coins he keeps banging on about before knowing what is the appropriate course of action for them to take.

One thing that is clear is that he isn't going to stop, he's on a roll and loving it. So in responding we are just going to get the same thing everyday; The poor man's grim reaper pipes up with his daily shock headline based on selected, cherry-picked data for maximum effect, then calmer, more measured heads take exception, and others get angry that the same conversations are being had.

So perhaps the "ignore him and he'll go away approach" is best?


I shall henceforth hold my tongue (in a hygienically safe manner).

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 609
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 10:26:26 AM   
loki100


Posts: 6257
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: online
if anyone is interested, this is the model that is driving the UK government's response:

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

The annex has some US based data

Table 1 (p. 5), I've repeated below, its probably still the best estimate of both the likelihood of an instance of infection meaning admission to hospital and the mortality rate - (pick your age group):




edit: if you want a model you can investigate (& change key variables/assumptions) this is a decent attempt:

https://alhill.shinyapps.io/COVID19seir/

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by loki100 -- 3/19/2020 10:29:13 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Pvt_Grunt)
Post #: 610
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 11:12:33 AM   
Zovs


Posts: 4559
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline
Thanks loki100 that is the most reasonable thing I have seen posted in days.

_____________________________


War in the East/War in the East II - Alpha Test Teams
WarPlan Beta Tester
DG CWIE2 tester/SPWW2 and SPMBT playtester/scenario & campaign creator

(in reply to loki100)
Post #: 611
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 1:48:05 PM   
rommel222

 

Posts: 481
Joined: 9/21/2015
Status: offline
Greetings RangerJoe,
Wife and I are both A+ blood type and we stay indoors as much as possible. We make use of the reserved 1 hour senior shopping in supermarkets here in Saratoga, NY.
Wife and I do not have the corona virus and hope to keep it that way since we both have compromised immune systems and both in our 60's.

(in reply to Zovs)
Post #: 612
RE: OT - The New Coronavirus - 3/19/2020 2:21:51 PM   
rico21

 

Posts: 2763
Joined: 3/11/2016
Status: offline
Any info on the fact that a person infected by only one other, is more likely to get out of it than if it was contaminated by 10 person at the same time?

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 613
RE: OT - The New Coronavirus - 3/19/2020 2:31:39 PM   
z1812


Posts: 1626
Joined: 9/1/2004
From: Toronto Ontario
Status: offline
Worth Reading. https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/health/coronavirus-death-rate-drops-better-math-better-treatment-or-more-testing

(in reply to rico21)
Post #: 614
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 2:41:24 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 3786
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Does that information include the cases where people got sick from the virus but it was not reported as such? That number should be included.


Now you are being silly.

There are millions more flu cases than are reported annually but no one is sick enough to go to the doctor. Yet I see people reciting flu deaths as if every flu illness was reported. Reciting those numbers as proof and then doing the opposite for some other virus is plainly irrational. So, we either go with reported cases for every illness or we shut up. Consistency is vital.

< Message edited by Lobster -- 3/19/2020 2:42:32 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 615
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 2:45:44 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11917
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
quote:

warspite1

Zorch, RangerJoe I really wouldn't bother. He's clearly enjoying his five minutes of fame and appears to be getting off on the numbers rising higher. He knows that if this thing does prove worse than we are currently being led to believe then he can be the all knowing sage - and if in time the numbers prove to be lower, then he can use his 'mathematical formula' as his defence.


You do not know what my motives are. All the above is a lie. This is some sort of "shoot the messenger" syndrome.

quote:

I note he hasn't broken his numbers down by country - after all that would expose the absurdity of his 'methodology'. You mention 100% Zorch, but the US is around 50% death rate (according to him) so instead of telling the active cases in the US they have to die, just tell them they need to flip one of those coins he keeps banging on about before knowing what is the appropriate course of action for them to take.


Breaking it down by country would be data manipulation. The virus didn't originate in the US. Sick people were shipped here from elsewhere. The US can't be viewed in a stand-alone way. The Worldwide numbers are the only ones that matter.

quote:

One thing that is clear is that he isn't going to stop, he's on a roll and loving it. So in responding we are just going to get the same thing everyday; The poor man's grim reaper pipes up with his daily shock headline based on selected, cherry-picked data for maximum effect, then calmer, more measured heads take exception, and others get angry that the same conversations are being had.

So perhaps the "ignore him and he'll go away approach" is best?


Just more lies. Again, you do not know my motives. For the record, my motive is that I am very concerned about the figures I'm getting. Yes, others are arguing against them, but not cogently.

< Message edited by Curtis Lemay -- 3/19/2020 2:46:01 PM >


_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 616
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 2:47:57 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11917
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
Today's figures:

Total Cases: 225252
Total Recovered: 85826
Total Dead: 9276
(Wikipedia)

Death Rate = 9276 / (9276 + 85826) = 9.8%

Up from 9.4% yesterday.

_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 617
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 2:50:22 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21005
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
Some of the math in here reminds me of the guy starting a round of golf, scoring an eagle on the first hole, and projecting confidently that he'll finish at 36 under par.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 3/19/2020 3:25:13 PM >

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)
Post #: 618
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 3:18:35 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 34181
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
Please keep it civil. Curtis can post what numbers he wants to post. Feel free to discuss, don't make it personal.

_____________________________


Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development




For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 619
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 3:27:34 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 3786
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Curtis is the kind of guy who would start a round of golf, score an eagle on the first hole, and project confidently that he'll finish at 36 under par.


I see others not even playing the round and using rounds they have never played as proof of their prowess. In every game only the finished ones count as won or lost. You can't use imagined games as a factor.

Any disease is 'Schrodinger's disease'. If you are still sick you are either died from it or survived it. But until you 'open the box' (the disease has come to a conclusion with the patient) you don't know. Only resolved cases can concretely be verified as dead or alive. If you can tell me how someone who currently is sick with the latest virus out of Asia is going to resolve with 100% accuracy then someone at WHO would like to have a talk with you.

People can blather all they want about who is still sick. But until they have either died from it or survived it you can't count them as resolved. And only until it is resolved you can't count them as dead from it or alive/survived it because they are still sick.

All Bob is doing is counting resolved cases. Yet everyone gets their panties in a wad because everyone is obviously an expert as to how anything should be counted.

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong. I'm simply saying someone is showing their numbers based on a specific data point. Nothing wrong with that. Well, unless your ego has trouble fitting into a football field.

< Message edited by Lobster -- 3/19/2020 3:29:14 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 620
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 4:12:41 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41726
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Curtis is the kind of guy who would start a round of golf, score an eagle on the first hole, and project confidently that he'll finish at 36 under par.


I see others not even playing the round and using rounds they have never played as proof of their prowess. In every game only the finished ones count as won or lost. You can't use imagined games as a factor.

Any disease is 'Schrodinger's disease'. If you are still sick you are either died from it or survived it. But until you 'open the box' (the disease has come to a conclusion with the patient) you don't know. Only resolved cases can concretely be verified as dead or alive. If you can tell me how someone who currently is sick with the latest virus out of Asia is going to resolve with 100% accuracy then someone at WHO would like to have a talk with you.

People can blather all they want about who is still sick. But until they have either died from it or survived it you can't count them as resolved. And only until it is resolved you can't count them as dead from it or alive/survived it because they are still sick.

All Bob is doing is counting resolved cases. Yet everyone gets their panties in a wad because everyone is obviously an expert as to how anything should be counted.

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong. I'm simply saying someone is showing their numbers based on a specific data point. Nothing wrong with that. Well, unless your ego has trouble fitting into a football field.
warspite1

So who has claimed to be an expert? who claims to know exactly what to do with the largest variable we have? What's it got to do with ego? Ego? I don't give a stuff about ego. Like most people I have a family to protect and knowledge is a vital commodity (same as it ever was). So its got nothing to do with proving what an 'expert' everyone is, and everything to do with trying to get sensible, non-alarmist, but as accurate as possible information.





< Message edited by warspite1 -- 3/19/2020 4:36:12 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 621
RE: OT - The New Coronavirus - 3/19/2020 4:34:40 PM   
rico21

 

Posts: 2763
Joined: 3/11/2016
Status: offline
I am currently studying the behavior of the virus.
He behaves like a pirate.
Its purpose, the mineral salts that you carry.
It attacks the cargoes least well protected by the antibodies of the immune system.
It proliferates much more in some regions than in others, probably more potential prey and a climate that suits it, for him they are the equivalent of the Caribbean of yesteryear.
But what is the Royal Navy doing?

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 622
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 4:37:21 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 3786
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lobster

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Curtis is the kind of guy who would start a round of golf, score an eagle on the first hole, and project confidently that he'll finish at 36 under par.


I see others not even playing the round and using rounds they have never played as proof of their prowess. In every game only the finished ones count as won or lost. You can't use imagined games as a factor.

Any disease is 'Schrodinger's disease'. If you are still sick you are either died from it or survived it. But until you 'open the box' (the disease has come to a conclusion with the patient) you don't know. Only resolved cases can concretely be verified as dead or alive. If you can tell me how someone who currently is sick with the latest virus out of Asia is going to resolve with 100% accuracy then someone at WHO would like to have a talk with you.

People can blather all they want about who is still sick. But until they have either died from it or survived it you can't count them as resolved. And only until it is resolved you can't count them as dead from it or alive/survived it because they are still sick.

All Bob is doing is counting resolved cases. Yet everyone gets their panties in a wad because everyone is obviously an expert as to how anything should be counted.

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong. I'm simply saying someone is showing their numbers based on a specific data point. Nothing wrong with that. Well, unless your ego has trouble fitting into a football field.
warspite1

So who has claimed to be an expert? who claims to know exactly what to do with the largest variable we have? What's it got to do with ego? Ego? I don't give a stuff about ego. Like most people I have a family to protect and knowledge is a vital commodity (same as it ever was). So its got nothing to do with proving what an 'expert' everyone is, and everything to do with trying to get sensible, non-alarmist, but as accurate as possible information.






Bob used two data points. Same data points that people who are more qualified than anyone on this board. If you want to use different data points fine. Not my call. But when people call someone wrong because of the factual data points they use and continue down that line then I have to question their motives.

If you are looking for the data points that tell you the risk of a people group in a particular area getting this virus then you need to look at local data, not global, not national but local. It varies greatly by where you are. You need to look at what is happening where you are, certainly not global. I'm certainly not an expert but even I know this.

< Message edited by Lobster -- 3/19/2020 4:41:56 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 623
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 5:12:03 PM   
rico21

 

Posts: 2763
Joined: 3/11/2016
Status: offline
This thread is interesting for the variety of these opinions.
Personally, if if I want to hear: "blablabla, don't worry blablabla everything will be better tomorrow blablabla but not today ...".
I turn on the TV.

(in reply to Lobster)
Post #: 624
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 5:20:15 PM   
Lobster


Posts: 3786
Joined: 8/8/2013
From: Third rock from the Sun.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rico21

This thread is interesting for the variety of these opinions.
Personally, if if I want to hear: "blablabla, don't worry blablabla everything will be better tomorrow blablabla but not today ...".
I turn on the TV.




The blablabla for where I live is low probability so far. But since stupidity seems to be a common human trait I don't hold out much hope.

In addition, since my eight brothers and sisters are all in the at risk group low spread is a good thing. But then we are all smart enough to keep from being exposed. It's not really that hard.

< Message edited by Lobster -- 3/19/2020 5:24:11 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

(in reply to rico21)
Post #: 625
RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 5:30:38 PM   
Zovs


Posts: 4559
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline
Sorry but Bob's numbers do not line up with what the 'experts' are saying. His math formals are faulty and incorrect per the experts.

Per the 'experts':

  • The COVID-19 death rate — the number of known deaths divided by the total number of confirmed cases — varies widely by country right now.
  • In Italy, as of Tuesday, it was about 8%, while in the US it was 1.7%.
  • Worldwide, more than 212,000 people have been infected with the new coronavirus, and at least 8,700 people have died.
  • Generally, the death rate seems to decrease as more people are tested and cases are confirmed.

    The worst areas are: Italy (7.94%), Iran (6.11%), Spain (4.5%), and China (3.98%).

    https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-death-rate-by-country-current-fatalities-compared-to-cases-2020-3

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30195-X/fulltext

    _____________________________


    War in the East/War in the East II - Alpha Test Teams
    WarPlan Beta Tester
    DG CWIE2 tester/SPWW2 and SPMBT playtester/scenario & campaign creator

    (in reply to Lobster)
  • Post #: 626
    RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 5:33:36 PM   
    warspite1


    Posts: 41726
    Joined: 2/2/2008
    From: England
    Status: offline
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Lobster

    Bob used two data points. Same data points that people who are more qualified than anyone on this board. If you want to use different data points fine. Not my call. But when people call someone wrong because of the factual data points they use and continue down that line then I have to question their motives.

    warspite1

    Not sure I understand this point. Motives? I can't speak for anyone else but I've given my motives. I want to protect my family and I want to know the truth. Simple, No hidden agenda, no hidden reason, just simply a family man wanting to know what we are dealing with - good or bad.

    As for calling someone wrong for using two factual data points? Please. Put it this way (and this isn't supposed to be a perfect analogy because there isn't one); I want to know the answer to 1 + ? + 3. I don't know what ? is but I have a range and I know its not 0. But what I will do is simply add 1 and 3 and totally ignore ?. There. I won't explain what the range of ? is. I won't suggest what method I've used and where my treatment of ? fits in. I shall simply ignore it. In so doing I have 'two factual data points' so the answer must be right, yes? No, its not right. And I just don't get why that is so difficult. And then to suggest that saying its wrong means there must be some ulterior motive? Really? Wow. No. It simply means I know the answer is wrong. I don't know by how much (I'm not an expert) but I do know its wrong. I have no motive for that other than I want to know the correct number so don't want the incorrect number spouted as gospel. There. That's my motive.

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Lobster

    If you are looking for the data points that tell you the risk of a people group in a particular area getting this virus then you need to look at local data, not global, not national but local. It varies greatly by where you are. You need to look at what is happening where you are, certainly not global. I'm certainly not an expert but even I know this.

    warspite1

    His numbers aren't designed for that though - whether global or local - it's just a scary overall % based on incomplete data.


    < Message edited by warspite1 -- 3/19/2020 6:06:53 PM >


    _____________________________

    England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



    (in reply to Lobster)
    Post #: 627
    RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 5:50:09 PM   
    loki100


    Posts: 6257
    Joined: 10/20/2012
    From: Utlima Thule
    Status: online

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Lobster

    ...

    Bob used two data points. Same data points that people who are more qualified than anyone on this board. If you want to use different data points fine. Not my call. But when people call someone wrong because of the factual data points they use and continue down that line then I have to question their motives.
    ...


    There are two problems with his 'data' points and how he combines them. First, the infected N is too low, we know this not least as (for eg) the UK stopped proper testing unless you were admitted to hospital. So going back to my table above, we only have the ratio between disease+hospital admission and outcome.

    Second, lets make the heroic assumption that his data is correct and complete. We know/strongly fear, that this thing is going to infect most people - hence all the various states trying to delay this so as to keep some functioning society as it works through the population. His numbers can only be applied to that near complete population group if (and only if) the sample of infected is typical of the wider population. Its not. Which is why statisticians then apply all sorts of moderating factors to come up with estimates using the data from the sample (and that is what he has) to the full population.

    Ignoring this expertise and process is pretty obtuse.

    _____________________________


    (in reply to Lobster)
    Post #: 628
    RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 6:20:05 PM   
    Lobster


    Posts: 3786
    Joined: 8/8/2013
    From: Third rock from the Sun.
    Status: offline

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: loki100


    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Lobster

    ...

    Bob used two data points. Same data points that people who are more qualified than anyone on this board. If you want to use different data points fine. Not my call. But when people call someone wrong because of the factual data points they use and continue down that line then I have to question their motives.
    ...


    There are two problems with his 'data' points and how he combines them. First, the infected N is too low, we know this not least as (for eg) the UK stopped proper testing unless you were admitted to hospital. So going back to my table above, we only have the ratio between disease+hospital admission and outcome.

    Second, lets make the heroic assumption that his data is correct and complete. We know/strongly fear, that this thing is going to infect most people - hence all the various states trying to delay this so as to keep some functioning society as it works through the population. His numbers can only be applied to that near complete population group if (and only if) the sample of infected is typical of the wider population. Its not. Which is why statisticians then apply all sorts of moderating factors to come up with estimates using the data from the sample (and that is what he has) to the full population.

    Ignoring this expertise and process is pretty obtuse.


    Don't even bother. The only official figures you can rely on are those monitored. We all know there are thousands and thousands that have the virus and are undetected. Monitored cases are the only ones that anyone can rely on. Regardless of how many suppositions, theories, educated guesses and models based on those things they are just that, educated guesses.

    _____________________________

    http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/

    "There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

    (in reply to loki100)
    Post #: 629
    RE: FROM THE RED ZONE - 3/19/2020 6:20:12 PM   
    z1812


    Posts: 1626
    Joined: 9/1/2004
    From: Toronto Ontario
    Status: offline
    From the reading I have done, I don't see that it will ever be possible to arrive at a "true" fatality percentage. There are many who get the virus, recover at home, and never report. Therefore any results are skewed.

    The best anyone can do is follow the established protocols and protect themselves and their families.

    (in reply to loki100)
    Post #: 630
    Page:   <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
    All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: FROM THE RED ZONE Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
    Jump to:





    New Messages No New Messages
    Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
    Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
     Post New Thread
     Reply to Message
     Post New Poll
     Submit Vote
     Delete My Own Post
     Delete My Own Thread
     Rate Posts


    Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

    0.187