APARRANTLY THE DEATH RATE IS DOUBLE WHAT THEY PREDICTED IN THE US!

[Turq]

Yep. The U.S. government reacted to predictions from U of Washington and Imperial College.

So who/what do you think is responsible?

Your answer that the US response to this pandemic, which YOU describe as being like a "third world Country", can be blamed on a British Citizen and an independent research organization is nuts. Even if it were true, the fact that they didn't use the resources of this great Country, and instead relied on a British epidemiologist and an independent research organization to respond to this tragedy, which somehow absolves them of blame, makes my head hurt just to think about.

And FTR no I'm not happy with the response to this pandemic, particularly the lack of equipment for the front line workers, the wacky, haphazard state of testing, and the lack of a coherent nation wide master plan. But again "Third World response" is not how I would have described it.

As for blame, I think there is a lot of that to go around. But call me funny. I think any real leader worth his weight in salt.... takes responsibility when things don't go right. They certainly don't blame others and deflect when things go wrong on their watch. I personally would much prefer to hear "we screwed up, but we're working on fixing it". That works for me....Instead of "we have done a perfect job!" Which I consider insulting to my intelligence. And I will leave it at that.

 

[Gamecock]

As for blame, I think there is a lot of that to go around. But call me funny. I think any real leader worth his weight in salt.... takes responsibility when things don't go right. They certainly don't blame others and deflect when things go wrong on their watch. I personally would much prefer to hear "we screwed up, but we're working on fixing it". That works for me....Instead of "we have done a perfect job!" Which I consider insulting to my intelligence. And I will leave it at that.

You speak in riddles.

 

[Gamecock]

Your answer that the US response to this pandemic, which YOU describe as being like a "third world Country", can be blamed on a British Citizen and an independent research organization is nuts.

Inaccurate Virus Models Are Panicking Officials Into Ill-advised Lockdowns

Read 'em and weep.

 

[ladder13]

Inaccurate Virus Models Are Panicking Officials Into Ill-advised Lockdowns

Read 'em and weep.

But muh links are better than yours.

51,495

 

[03hemi]

If a person dies in the hospital and has no insurance, the hospital gets $39,000 for each Covid-19 death federal grant money, there's no reason to "fake" the numbers and change the cause of death? Let that sink in.

 

[biku324]

How do I find confirmation from whomever supposedly pays that $39,000 that this is true? Specifically, who pays, and how do I find the remittance amount from the check writers?

 

[ladder13]

If a person dies in the hospital and has no insurance, the hospital gets $39,000 for each Covid-19 death federal grant money, there's no reason to "fake" the numbers and change the cause of death? Let that sink in.

A bit murky, not for deaths but for care? sometimes they get paid more?

The hospital gets an increased stipend for putting someone on a ventilator as per Medicare? Yep, much more, even exceeding $39000.

These links, if one believes the sources , make things clear as mud.

Are there shenanigans going on? Possibly.

The truth is out there somewhere.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...19-payments/&usg=AOvVaw0JagdIRbfQXV4zU4cLmh_j

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...19-payments/&usg=AOvVaw0JagdIRbfQXV4zU4cLmh_j

 

[Rustyt1953]

Hamilton County (where I live) has a population just shy of I million. There have been 102 deaths attributed to Covid-19. Chemo brain has dulled my math skills so you guys figure it out.

 

[Hapworth]

Inaccurate Virus Models Are Panicking Officials Into Ill-advised Lockdowns

Read 'em and weep.

That article is from almost two months ago and compares models from before measures like social distancing and stay-at-home were implemented and compares them to the numbers from places where those measures were used.

 

[Hapworth]

...51,495

Over 80,000 today and counting, with the hardest initially hit coastal cities where the greatest measures were taken combat the virus are now on the decrease while the central parts of the country start to spike...

 

[Hapworth]

How do I find confirmation from whomever supposedly pays that $39,000 that this is true? Specifically, who pays, and how do I find the remittance amount from the check writers?

It isn't accurate as posted, it's a bit of mis-or-disinfo that has been passed around since April.

It's based on a change in legislation in response to the pandemic, allowing Medicare to pay hospitals at higher rates for COVID-19 patients -- those rates vary significantly on -case-by-case.

For those inclined to conspiracy thinking, that fact alone is hard proof that hospitals are inflating cases and deaths.

ladder13 covered it correctly and the links are reliable.

 

[Oldsalt66]

If the press says it, it’s probably false, especially the MSM.

Almost a certainty.

 

[Gamecock]

That article is from almost two months ago and compares models from before measures like social distancing and stay-at-home were implemented and compares them to the numbers from places where those measures were used.

The issue was the panic. Which started more than two months ago. Imperial College is mentioned as a source of the predictions. Which was called 'nuts' by another poster. It is actually nuts in a way, but it is reality.

 

[Hapworth]

The issue was the panic. Which started more than two months ago. Imperial College is mentioned as a source of the predictions. Which was called 'nuts' by another poster. It is actually nuts in a way, but it is reality.

Another member posted this and it's worth repeating:

All models are wrong; some models are useful.

Also, at the outset of a new phenomena, the models will invariably be the most off because that's when the least data is available.

Those first models suffered from -- among other things -- a lack of data, which changes for the better every passing day, but also reflected projections based on non-intervention, a path that ultimately wasn't chosen.

But that article plays a slanted game by cherry picking where in the timeline it takes its numbers, and doesn't lend insight into where we are now.

If today someone posted an article from January on the economy and said that everything's fine, that'd be just as misleading.

 

[LVSteve]

Another member posted this and it's worth repeating:

All models are wrong; some models are useful.

Also, at the outset of a new phenomena, the models will invariably be the most off because that's when the least data is available.

Those first models suffered from -- among other things -- a lack of data, which changes for the better every passing day, but also reflected projections based on non-intervention, a path that ultimately wasn't chosen.

Sadly, any attempts at modeling now will likely be equally as inaccurate because of the dismal lack of testing.

The UK announced its loosening of the lockdown rules in a set of speeches and documents best described as vagueness wrapped in ambiguity. I fear for my extended family back there.

 

[biku324]

For what it's worth, the below is from our company, courtesy of our customer:

Presumptions vs Realities of Testing Asymptomatic individuals for COVID-19 (C-19) infection

Presumptions made with asymptomatic testing
Current Realities

The individual with a negative test is not C-19 infected and can work without endangering others
At that moment the individual is not shedding virus. Does NOT mean no shedding 6 hours, 1 day or 1 week later

By swabbing everyone we will discover asymptomatic cases that are spreading infections in the workspace
- Some cases will be identified who will be sent home for isolation
- Those without symptoms are not coughing and sneezing and with social distancing are not the main drivers of workspace spread of C-19
- Asymptomatics are a greater factor in intimate household settings
- Large expenditure of time and resources for minimal gain

Critical staff can be protected by pretesting all those who will be attending a meeting
- A negative test would provide reasonable assurance that the individual is not shedding virus that day
- Would need daily repetition
- Testing may give a false sense of safety, ~15% tests may be false negative

Testing will reassure vulnerable individuals that they can safely return to work as everyone in their workspace has
been tested and is negative
Testing results will not be available the day of testing.
Results available the next day do NOT indicate a coworker is not shedding virus that next day.

Widespread testing of asymptomatics reassures staff that the company is doing everything to make them safe in the workplace
The press has already reported that yields a false sense of safety and a massive use of resources with little benefit.
Reassurance may be replaced with a perception of an attempt at deceiving employees into feeling safer.

Testing can be performed for all employees
Asymptomatic testing would exceed current testing capacity and uses supplies needed for ill patients:
- C-19 assay test kits remain in short supply
- Swabs for nasopharyngeal sampling are difficult to obtain
- Even the most rapid assays available would require weeks to complete

Testing of asymptomatic contacts of C-19 cases will show they are not infected and allow them to return to work
instead of Quarantine for 14 days
Testing of asymptomatic contacts determines they are not shedding virus at that moment; does NOT determine if they are incubating infection and may be sick the next day.
They must still Quarantine for 14 days after last contact.

 

[03hemi]

A bit murky, not for deaths but for care? sometimes they get paid more?

The hospital gets an increased stipend for putting someone on a ventilator as per Medicare? Yep, much more, even exceeding $39000.

These links, if one believes the sources , make things clear as mud.

Are there shenanigans going on? Possibly.

The truth is out there somewhere.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...19-payments/&usg=AOvVaw0JagdIRbfQXV4zU4cLmh_j

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...19-payments/&usg=AOvVaw0JagdIRbfQXV4zU4cLmh_j

Yeah, it's not like a hospital to scam anybody out of money?

 

[Gamecock]

YouTube

21:40

From last night. Make you happy?

 

[Hapworth]

YouTube

21:40

From last night. Make you happy?

No -- that's just a more recent example of the same cherry-picked data and hindsite bias.

 

[ladder13]

Selective hearing doesn’t cut it.