Why is wearing a mask so difficult?

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,277
18,267
113
New talking point? You really can't go with only the death count matters as death rates are going up in all irresponsible states.
No, they are not. Death rates have been basically falling off a cliff since the beginning.

At the end of the day, death count is the only thing that matters.
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: plasticbertrand

mundus

Duke status
Feb 26, 2018
37,587
16,552
113
No, they are not. Death rates have been basically falling off a cliff since the beginning.

At the end of the day, death count is the only thing that matters.
Really? Texas and Florida just set records for deaths.
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,277
18,267
113
He's going by the fallacy that everyone has already been infected which isn't the case.

150,000 by end of next week. 300,000+ by election day and that's assuming only 1,000 dead per day. It could end being a lot more. We will learn a lot in the next 2 - 6 weeks.
Not everyone but orders of magnitude more than have been tested

And this is also about comparing to previous pandemics. We don't talk about how many infected people died in the Black Plague or Spanish Flu, we talk about how many died out of the total population. This is a crucial point to show how minor this is compared to what humankind has gone through in even the recent past; worse plagues that they didn't purposefully shut down the world for

And after all, WE R ALL IN DIS 2GETHER!
 

Kento

Duke status
Jan 11, 2002
69,222
21,725
113
The Bar
No, they are not. Death rates have been basically falling off a cliff since the beginning.

At the end of the day, death count is the only thing that matters.
Not exactly an accurate analysis.

Death counts increased substantially to 2,500/day until around Memorial Day and then decreased a bit as social distancing was generally occurring. But obviously everything went out the window and cases have exploded. You are starting to see this propagate with death counts creeping back up towards 1,000/day over the last week and change. That's the leading edge, the P-wave before the big shake if you will. 2 - 6 weeks from now, we'll see how fast the death count rises since you're looking at a death rate of around 5-6%. I'd say it builds back up to around 2,500/day again (at least) by early August. Being conservative with that.
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,277
18,267
113
Really? Texas and Florida just set records for deaths.
Sure, if you count against total population rather than infection rate. Kento just told me we should be counting against total infections

So if there are more deaths but orders of magnitude more have been tested you get a lower death rate.

We can play with the numbers however we want to make our points
 

Kento

Duke status
Jan 11, 2002
69,222
21,725
113
The Bar
Not everyone but orders of magnitude more than have been tested

And this is also about comparing to previous pandemics. We don't talk about how many infected people died in the Black Plague or Spanish Flu, we talk about how many died out of the total population. This is a crucial point to show how minor this is compared to what humankind has gone through in even the recent past; worse plagues that they didn't purposefully shut down the world for

And after all, WE R ALL IN DIS 2GETHER!
But you know as well as I do that the death rate of those infected is an important percentage, especially as you are in the middle of it as opposed to after it has run its course. Obviously this is nowhere near as deadly as Ebola but what would you be most interested in if you had a potential of exposure: the odds of death upon contraction or how many people had it total?
 

Kento

Duke status
Jan 11, 2002
69,222
21,725
113
The Bar
Sure, if you count against total population rather than infection rate. Kento just told me we should be counting against total infections

So if there are more deaths but orders of magnitude more have been tested you get a lower death rate.

We can play with the numbers however we want to make our points
The 99.96% survival rate is based on absolute ambiguous junk science.
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,277
18,267
113
The 99.96% survival rate is based on absolute ambiguous junk science.
It is about how many people are dying out of the population, and that's all that matters in a pandemic situation where we're ALL basically at risk of getting this
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,277
18,267
113
Not worth engaging. He just keeps moving the goalposts. He won’t see it as a problem until it affects him or his life.

Cut bait.
It has been affecting my life. The cure is worse than the disease

It's about perspective

WE R ALL IN DIS 2GETHER
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,277
18,267
113
But you know as well as I do that the death rate of those infected is an important percentage, especially as you are in the middle of it as opposed to after it has run its course. Obviously this is nowhere near as deadly as Ebola but what would you be most interested in if you had a potential of exposure: the odds of death upon contraction or how many people had it total?
Knowing how many people have had it total is the most important to know, and the odds of death upon contraction are heavily skewed because of how this affects different ages. Saying it has a 6% death rate overall is disingenuous when someone who is 70 has a exponentially higher risk of dying of it than someone who is 40 or someone who is 15
 

Kento

Duke status
Jan 11, 2002
69,222
21,725
113
The Bar
It is about how many people are dying out of the population, and that's all that matters in a pandemic situation where we're ALL basically at risk of getting this
But you have absolutely zero idea of how many people have actually contracted it, making any attempt at calculating a true death percentage a SWAG (at best). You go with the numbers that are actually tangible.
 

Random Guy

Duke status
Jan 16, 2002
32,271
6,439
113
im not saying that we shouldn’t be looking for ways to open as much as makes sense, but the discounting of people who are old and people with high blood pressure, diabetes, or overweight, is insinuating that those lives matter less
and maybe some of those lives matter less, but many matter just as much as any other life
ignoring that makes it difficult to focus on your intended point
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kento

Kento

Duke status
Jan 11, 2002
69,222
21,725
113
The Bar
Knowing how many people have had it total is the most important to know, and the odds of death upon contraction are heavily skewed because of how this affects different ages. Saying it has a 6% death rate overall is disingenuous when someone who is 70 has a exponentially higher risk of dying of it than someone who is 40 or someone who is 15
All Lives Matter.

And besides, you are moving goalposts big-time there. The overall death rate right now as it stands is 8%.
 

Ifallalot

Duke status
Dec 17, 2008
89,277
18,267
113
im not saying that we shouldn’t be looking for ways to open as much as makes sense, but the discounting of people who are old and people with high blood pressure, diabetes, or overweight, is insinuating that those lives matter less
and maybe some of those lives matter less, but many matter just as much as any other life
ignoring that makes it difficult to focus on your intended point
When it comes to things like deciding whether to open schools or not those lives DO matter less than the lives of the youth, especially when you factor in potential of who can do what for society and the economy

See, I can think collectively! ;)