So here's the deal on this virus

[Chief Arrowhead]

Maybe this consensus has already been vetted here and if so I apologize. Unfortunately due to my career I've researched much more than I have wanted to. As a result I am highly confident of the following:

1) At the time when we really didn't know anything (allegedly) it seems reasonable in hindsight to have curtailed or 'locked down' human activity. The concern was our health care system being overrun. I'll let that slide

2) The scary part for the masses is the Death Ratio. The IMHE modeling uses CFR which is simply Deaths divided by Cases. Early on it was assumed that this Death Ratio was up to 5%.

3) Since then improved testing and experiential data has shown that rate to be lower, much lower. Many acquired the virus and had no symptoms. For others the symptoms were mild and toughed it out. They were never tested which resulted in an inaccurate, much lower divisor. I believe that I am in the second group, a week in March was a rough one.

4) a deep dive into the data shows that the Death Ratio is most likely lower than .5%.

Meaning: Let's use .5% as the actual ratio. That means that for every 1000 people that contract the virus 5 die. Dat is also showing that of those 5 deaths FOUR are either over 70 and/or have co-morbidities that the virus really attacks hard like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, lung disease, blood disorders like anemia, etc.

5) the End Game : Out of 1000 that contract the virus 1 person under 70 without co-morbidities dies.


So we've wrecked the economy and willfully wreaked havoc on peoples' livelihoods, life's work and societal gathering (concerts. football, church, etc.). Traditionally a quarantine is meant to isolate the sick and vulnerable as others go about their lives. This little experiment done by 'experts' will most likely be much worse to human society for years and years. It won't go back to being the same. Ever. This is not to discount the pain and agony of those that succumb and their loved ones. Not at all this thing is hideous to die from. But at the end of the day we have to reckon with the 'worth' of all this for pretty much 1 in a 1000.

The real failure is not what was done when the virus was novel, the true damage is being done right now when we know what it is all about.

Enjoy your weekend.

[Sir C]

Too right Chief. Those in power have **** themselves and listened to frauds masquerading as scientists, as a result of which the world as we know it has disappeared. How many will die as a result of the enormous drop in living standards we will all experience?

It’s a tragedy and there’s **** all we can do about it.

[barrybueno]

Maybe this consensus has already been vetted here and if so I apologize. Unfortunately due to my career I've researched much more than I have wanted to. As a result I am highly confident of the following:

1) At the time when we really didn't know anything (allegedly) it seems reasonable in hindsight to have curtailed or 'locked down' human activity. The concern was our health care system being overrun. I'll let that slide

2) The scary part for the masses is the Death Ratio. The IMHE modeling uses CFR which is simply Deaths divided by Cases. Early on it was assumed that this Death Ratio was up to 5%.

3) Since then improved testing and experiential data has shown that rate to be lower, much lower. Many acquired the virus and had no symptoms. For others the symptoms were mild and toughed it out. They were never tested which resulted in an inaccurate, much lower divisor. I believe that I am in the second group, a week in March was a rough one.

4) a deep dive into the data shows that the Death Ratio is most likely lower than .5%.

Meaning: Let's use .5% as the actual ratio. That means that for every 1000 people that contract the virus 5 die. Dat is also showing that of those 5 deaths FOUR are either over 70 and/or have co-morbidities that the virus really attacks hard like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, lung disease, blood disorders like anemia, etc.

5) the End Game : Out of 1000 that contract the virus 1 person under 70 without co-morbidities dies.


So we've wrecked the economy and willfully wreaked havoc on peoples' livelihoods, life's work and societal gathering (concerts. football, church, etc.). Traditionally a quarantine is meant to isolate the sick and vulnerable as others go about their lives. This little experiment done by 'experts' will most likely be much worse to human society for years and years. It won't go back to being the same. Ever. This is not to discount the pain and agony of those that succumb and their loved ones. Not at all this thing is hideous to die from. But at the end of the day we have to reckon with the 'worth' of all this for pretty much 1 in a 1000.

The real failure is not what was done when the virus was novel, the true damage is being done right now when we know what it is all about.

Enjoy your weekend.

In summary we're all being screwed over. I guess we'll find out soon enough why the government have fúcked us like this and what their motives really are.

[Monty92]

You conclude by calculating the "cost" as being 1 in 1,000 infected people under 70 without co-morbidities dying. So a 71-year-old with diabetes who falls victim isn't part of your cost?

Maybe this consensus has already been vetted here and if so I apologize. Unfortunately due to my career I've researched much more than I have wanted to. As a result I am highly confident of the following:

1) At the time when we really didn't know anything (allegedly) it seems reasonable in hindsight to have curtailed or 'locked down' human activity. The concern was our health care system being overrun. I'll let that slide

2) The scary part for the masses is the Death Ratio. The IMHE modeling uses CFR which is simply Deaths divided by Cases. Early on it was assumed that this Death Ratio was up to 5%.

3) Since then improved testing and experiential data has shown that rate to be lower, much lower. Many acquired the virus and had no symptoms. For others the symptoms were mild and toughed it out. They were never tested which resulted in an inaccurate, much lower divisor. I believe that I am in the second group, a week in March was a rough one.

4) a deep dive into the data shows that the Death Ratio is most likely lower than .5%.

Meaning: Let's use .5% as the actual ratio. That means that for every 1000 people that contract the virus 5 die. Dat is also showing that of those 5 deaths FOUR are either over 70 and/or have co-morbidities that the virus really attacks hard like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, lung disease, blood disorders like anemia, etc.

5) the End Game : Out of 1000 that contract the virus 1 person under 70 without co-morbidities dies.


So we've wrecked the economy and willfully wreaked havoc on peoples' livelihoods, life's work and societal gathering (concerts. football, church, etc.). Traditionally a quarantine is meant to isolate the sick and vulnerable as others go about their lives. This little experiment done by 'experts' will most likely be much worse to human society for years and years. It won't go back to being the same. Ever. This is not to discount the pain and agony of those that succumb and their loved ones. Not at all this thing is hideous to die from. But at the end of the day we have to reckon with the 'worth' of all this for pretty much 1 in a 1000.

The real failure is not what was done when the virus was novel, the true damage is being done right now when we know what it is all about.

Enjoy your weekend.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Too right Chief. Those in power have **** themselves and listened to frauds masquerading as scientists, as a result of which the world as we know it has disappeared. How many will die as a result of the enormous drop in living standards we will all experience?

It’s a tragedy and there’s **** all we can do about it.

from our societies. We are democracies and we appointed them and elected them having educated them in the first place to pursue their vocations on our behalf. Many of them knew this was coming and did warn us but we, as is the wont of our freedom, chose to ignore them.

This not something that was done to us by them. There is only us. They are the phantoms we blame for our own failings. We deserve this.

[WES]

You conclude by calculating the "cost" as being 1 in 1,000 infected people under 70 without co-morbidities dying. So a 71-year-old with diabetes who falls victim isn't part of your cost?

Yes, that’s right. Chief is saying that people over 70 and those with underlying health conditions can be sacrificed so that we avoid a global recession. His president seem to agree.

Problem for Donald is that being over 70 and/or having a health condition doesn’t prevent you from voting.

Welcome aboard President Biden.

[barrybueno]

You conclude by calculating the "cost" as being 1 in 1,000 infected people under 70 without co-morbidities dying. So a 71-year-old with diabetes who falls victim isn't part of your cost?

Fúck the over 70's M, they had their go, time to shuffle off and let others have a turn. The Chinks have created someting amazing here, a virus that culls the aged and the weak. Then our díckhead experts come along and decide to punish everyone. ****s I tell thee, ****s!

Disclaimer: The view expressed in the content above are those of my mate and do not necessarily reflect the views of bb.

[Billy Goat Sverige]

Too right Chief. Those in power have **** themselves and listened to frauds masquerading as scientists, as a result of which the world as we know it has disappeared. How many will die as a result of the enormous drop in living standards we will all experience?

It’s a tragedy and there’s **** all we can do about it.

Who’d have thought it would be a crazy Swedish lefty doctor keeping a clear head and showing others the right path. Went to get my haircut last Friday

[barrybueno]

Who’d have thought it would be a crazy Swedish lefty doctor keeping a clear head and showing others the right path. Went to get my haircut last Friday

'kin ell Goats, pic!

wd Sweden btw

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

I'm not good at stats etc but in our population I'd say we have, out of a population of 60 million about 30 million are between 20 and 50 which, in anyone's book is an age range that death would be considered extremely untimely.

Are we saying that 1% of that age range in the UK would have perished in herd immunity? Is that not 300,000? I'm not sure how that would have played with the electorate.