Coronavirus math
Quote: AZDuffmanCALL TO MATH GUYS HERE.
0.00027% of the population has died of the virus. Without considering the number inflated, how many years would one live with a 0.00027% chance of dying from an event?
MATH ANSWERS ONLY, PLEASE!
You are off by a factor of 100. With 100,000 dead Americans, 0.03% of all Americans have died from coronavirus in roughly two months. (for world population, you're only off by a factor of 15).
If that rate of death continues with no changes, every one of us would have a 1.8% chance of dying from this disease within the next 10 years. Of course asking to extend two months of new data linearly is a very silly question.
For reference, 100,000 deaths in two months is very close to number of cancer deaths. Imagine if we required significant public interventions just to get cancer deaths down to its current level as the number one killer.
Quote: TomGYou are off by a factor of 100. With 100,000 dead Americans, 0.03% of all Americans have died from coronavirus in roughly two months. (for world population, you're only off by a factor of 15).
He said 0.00027% of the population, not Americans. Americans are so self-centered and think everything revolves around them. If we just say that Congo has no Covid deaths is that relevant? Always look at the biggest picture.
Quote: DRichHe said 0.00027% of the population, not Americans. Americans are so self-centered and think everything revolves around them. If we just say that Congo has no Covid deaths is that relevant? Always look at the biggest picture.
In that case he was still off by a factor of 15 and his question becomes even more nonsensical, as geography very often plays a huge role in causes of death. There might be 1,000,000 mosquito deaths per year, that doesn't mean people in Las Vegas have 0.01% chance of dying from mosquito bites this year. In all of world history, it seems about 0.5% of all human deaths have come from wars. That doesn't mean we all have a 1 in 200 chance of dying in a war. Soldiers fighting in a war have a much higher chance, while everyone else has a ,much lower chance. Instead of the biggest picture, it makes much more sense to look at the most relevant picture.
Quote: AZDuffmanNo, my statement is saying look at quarantine how an AP would look at a game. What are the odds of it happening? What are the odds of total wipeout? What is the risk/reward?
Risk to reward is a good way of looking at how we should handle coronavirus. I prefer cost to benefit. Something like 40 million people have lost their jobs, that seems like a very high cost. But that cost is not caused by the response to the pandemic. Even if there was no coordinated response there still would have been huge economic impact, as a lot of people would still choose to stay home, and a lot of people would be forced to stay home due to illness. Remember, there were Las Vegas casinos closing voluntarily before the governor ordered them to. And even if there was an even more extreme response, it could have come at a much lower cost if our economy wasn't so fragile to begin with.
For the 125 million who did not lose a job, the impact has been generally more minimal. As you pointed out, we can't mingle at restaurants or barbershops, and some people are required to wear masks in certain places. If other people are as bothered by that as you are, should be easy to start a hair cut and dinner out support group.
Every month in the US there are about 50,000 deaths from cancer and another 55,000 deaths from heart disease. So, Covid-19 has not been the leading cause of death in any of the past 4 months.
There are 10,000 deaths a month from Alzheimer's Disease. There are 4,000 suicides in the US a month.
When you have a very large number of people, then fairly infrequent events can rack up some impressive numbers.
There are about 330 million people in the US. IF 300 million people come out of a shutdown and another 50,000 people die as a result, then the average individual responsibility of any single person is that they caused 0.00017 people to die (many of them elderly and some of them near death in any case from cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer's, etc.).
So, these questions people are posting about "going out for a beer and killing your neighbors" lack an appropriate mathematical context of probability. You need the equivalent of an EV. You don't draw a royal flush on every deal of poker.
Quote: gordonm888Every month in the US there are about 50,000 deaths from cancer and another 55,000 deaths from heart disease. So, Covid-19 has not been the leading cause of death in any of the past 4 months.
The most accurate data often takes a year or two, but some places are showing 60,000 coronavirus deaths in April.
Quote: gordonm888There are 10,000 deaths a month from Alzheimer's Disease. There are 4,000 suicides in the US a month.
There are very little resources spent on suicide prevention. We had one of the most intensive interventions in history in response to the
coronavirus just to bring the deaths down to the number one killer for a month, and somewhere in the top three for the following month. That is pretty clear to me that the significant measures have made a significant impact on reducing the effects.
Quote: darkozBecause the pain of losing your kid is more than most parents want to deal with regardless of 1000:1 odds.
And if that woman you mentioned happens to be among the 1/1000 who does lose her kid what consolation that the odds were in her favor.
"But officer. I wasn't watching my kids because the odds were in my favor!"
IFIFIFIFIFIFIFIF
You take the odds when they are in your favor by that much. She of course would be sad. But she will be more sad if her kids grow up like so many helecoptered kids today do, unable to function for themselves and unable to deal with setbacks. Somehow before the late 1980s kids managed to go off and be kids, you just knew to be home for dinner.
And it is not 1 in 1000. It is that it would take 1,000 years for her kid to be snatched on average. If I could play a game where I will go 1,000 years on average without losing, I would play it if I could. But it would be hard to play because every AP in the state would be hogging the table.
Getting back to topic, her kids will not be among the group that wants to hide at home because they are afraid to go to a restaurant because a bug is going aroiund.
Quote: TomGRisk to reward is a good way of looking at how we should handle coronavirus. I prefer cost to benefit. Something like 40 million people have lost their jobs, that seems like a very high cost. But that cost is not caused by the response to the pandemic. Even if there was no coordinated response there still would have been huge economic impact, as a lot of people would still choose to stay home, and a lot of people would be forced to stay home due to illness. Remember, there were Las Vegas casinos closing voluntarily before the governor ordered them to. And even if there was an even more extreme response, it could have come at a much lower cost if our economy wasn't so fragile to begin with.
For the 125 million who did not lose a job, the impact has been generally more minimal. As you pointed out, we can't mingle at restaurants or barbershops, and some people are required to wear masks in certain places. If other people are as bothered by that as you are, should be easy to start a hair cut and dinner out support group.
I do not buy that you would have "a lot" if it was all voluntary. For starters, most people cannot take much more than a week off work without major financial impact. They would get up and go to work. Ditto opening small businesses, but that is even harder to close. Responsible adults would say, "I have rent due and mouths to feed, I have to go in!"
BTW: The economy was not "fragile." We had a 50 year low unemployment rate.
Bottom line is that we are well past when we should have opened up. People hate the mask rules and they hate staying home. The majority is ready to open up.
Let those who are afraid of dying stay home. Let the rest of us have our lives back.
Quote: AZDuffmanIFIFIFIFIFIFIFIF
You take the odds when they are in your favor by that much. She of course would be sad. But she will be more sad if her kids grow up like so many helecoptered kids today do, unable to function for themselves and unable to deal with setbacks. Somehow before the late 1980s kids managed to go off and be kids, you just knew to be home for dinner.
And it is not 1 in 1000. It is that it would take 1,000 years for her kid to be snatched on average. If I could play a game where I will go 1,000 years on average without losing, I would play it if I could. But it would be hard to play because every AP in the state would be hogging the table.
Getting back to topic, her kids will not be among the group that wants to hide at home because they are afraid to go to a restaurant because a bug is going aroiund.
First off please point to a source for this thousand year number. You keep saying that as fact but often when questioned you admit it's something you heard from your neighbors.
Secondly, any AP that risks his children based on odds is a stupid AP and needs child welfare called.
I imagine you advocate leaving the small kids home by themselves because the odds of a fire occurring are small while you are gone?
(BTW - I suggest having someone mathematical do those odds for you. For example, leaving the kids to go wandering free one time isn't the same as doing it every day. Sure that one time may be the one time they get snatched but certainly repeated abuse and neglect raises the odds of a bad occurrence)
As for the odds what you suggest, risking your kids because the odds are in your favor sounds like wagering on 35 numbers at roulette. Sure the odds are in your favor to win on any given spin with so many ways to win vs lose but the cost is still too great
Quote: darkozFirst off please point to a source for this thousand year number. You keep saying that as fact but often when questioned you admit it's something you heard from your neighbors.
Secondly, any AP that risks his children based on odds is a stupid AP and needs child welfare called.
It is math. You need to take the number of kids snatched by strangers and do some math. I heard it on a podcast interview but I forger which one.
Quote:I imagine you advocate leaving the small kids home by themselves because the odds of a fire occurring are small while you are gone?
Define "small." When I was a young kids as young as 10 would be left at home for a few hours at a time. Read up on "latchkey kids."
Quote:(BTW - I suggest having someone mathematical do those odds for you. For example, leaving the kids to go wandering free one time isn't the same as doing it every day. Sure that one time may be the one time they get snatched but certainly repeated abuse and neglect raises the odds of a bad occurrence)
The odds are about the same. Kids are just not "snatched" nearly as often as people want to think they are. All but a small percent are taken by parents in a custody battle or some other relative.
Quote:As for the odds what you suggest, risking your kids because the odds are in your favor sounds like wagering on 35 numbers at roulette. Sure the odds are in your favor to win on any given spin with so many ways to win vs lose but the cost is still too great
Except the roulette wheel would have 50,000 numbers and be just single 0.
Now, if you want to discuss this further I would request you take it to DT and start a thread as this is entering hijack territory. I will not entertain further discussion here to avoid suspension.
Quote: TomGIn that case he was still off by a factor of 15 and his question becomes even more nonsensical, as geography very often plays a huge role in causes of death. There might be 1,000,000 mosquito deaths per year, that doesn't mean people in Las Vegas have 0.01% chance of dying from mosquito bites this year. In all of world history, it seems about 0.5% of all human deaths have come from wars. That doesn't mean we all have a 1 in 200 chance of dying in a war. Soldiers fighting in a war have a much higher chance, while everyone else has a ,much lower chance. Instead of the biggest picture, it makes much more sense to look at the most relevant picture.
Yes, I have no idea what the actual numbers are, and personally I don't care. If every single person on this planet dies from this disease in the next year I would accept that for me personally having a good time until my number is called. I also think it would be interesting to see how that played out until I am one of the dead. I always want new experiences and seeing all the people become extinct would be interesting.
Quote: DRichYes, I have no idea what the actual numbers are, and personally I don't care. If every single person on this planet dies from this disease in the next year I would accept that for me personally having a good time until my number is called. I also think it would be interesting to see how that played out until I am one of the dead. I always want new experiences and seeing all the people become extinct would be interesting.
I think the WOV spring fling would be a little difficult to attend.
You will be eating that pizza pie by yourself
I only wear one indoors when I go out in public, not at home and with few to any transmissions tied to outdoors contact I’m not going to wear one when going hiking or to the park or something. But for indoors it certainly cuts down on transmission and otherwise doesn’t prohibit non eating/drinking activities. I think people should have the freedom to get a haircut, go to a mall, gambling or whatever if they choose but don’t understand not trying to limit the transmission probability per minute/hour while doing said activities.
Quote: AZDuffmanFor starters, most people cannot take much more than a week off work without major financial impact. They would get up and go to work.
...
BTW: The economy was not "fragile." We had a 50 year low unemployment rate.
You are completely contradicting yourself. Being unable to take a week off work without a major financial impact is the definition of a fragile economic situation. And you insist that represents the majority of people.
-----
Casinos and sports leagues closed voluntarily before states ordered them closed. Airlines cancelled most of their flights because of so little demand with customers not wanting to be stuck in a tube, breathing in their neighbors air for three hours. Around here, most daycare centers closed voluntarily due to low demand and to avoid spreading disease. Even if tattoo shops and movie theaters were allowed to be open, doesn't mean workers would be earning the same if customers aren't coming in at the same rate or their boss thinks it's a bad idea to open.
As you point out, many people in the workforce would have still been showing up due to necessity. Which means they would be definitely be showing up while sick. Which means their co-worker might have to miss work if they have severe reaction, and be hit with medical bills. Of course Amazon, Wal-Mart and other places have been hiring people on the spot for the past 2.5 months and they still can't fill all their positions, so it does seem the idea of people willing to get up and go to work is not true if the have any barriers.
It may be true that the containment efforts worked so well that we are at the point we should open back up. In NV, that's exactly where we are. Looks like about one week away to give the places a chance to put any health and safety measures into place.
Perhaps the most fascinating part of your whole shtick is insisting how much of a hardship it is to stay home or to wear a mask. No healthy person needs to stay home, anyone who wants to leave their house absolutely can. Mask requirement seem very limited most places: https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/facing-your-face-mask-duties-list-statewide-orders.
Quote: darkozI think the WOV spring fling would be a little difficult to attend.
You will be eating that pizza pie by yourself
With my health issues I would probably be one of the first to go, and I am okay with that.
Quote: TomGYou are completely contradicting yourself. Being unable to take a week off work without a major financial impact is the definition of a fragile economic situation. And you insist that represents the majority of people.
That is a fragile *personal* situation, not a fragile economic situation. I would not say majority, but about 35-40%. We see articles on it a few times a year saying "40% could not handle a $400 emergency."
These people are facing disaster while those who can work from home insist we stay shut down because they want to stay home, afraid to go out. Some starve while others stuff themselves.
Quote: mcallister3200AZ. Please explain the anti mask stance. I don’t really understand it.
Simple. They do not do anything. Few people have even a "paper respirator" mask. A piece of cloth will not filter out the smallest things, which viruses are. They get worn over and over, meaning you are breathing thru a dirty mask. You are still walking around touching things.
IOW, they are just a feel-good thing. We are talking the grocery store, not an OR when someone is cut open.
Anyone wants to wear one feel free. Quit making them mandatory so those in power are seen "doing something." That is what it is about. Deflect possible blame. "People died but I did all I could, I mandated masks!"
I KNOW the way most people are wearing them they are not 100% effective at stopping the spread. But I also KNOW that someone wearing one is LESS likely to spread a plume of virus, or spread less virus, than someone wearing one. So I am 100% willing to follow any ordinance, or even any store requirement, to wear one. The store won't let me in with a tank top, fine. They want me to wear shoes, ok. A mask, no problem.
The virus could be considered a deadly weapon. I don't think most people would be fine with someone waving a gun in their face whether it went off or not. Same case here.
Anyway, neither person is required to hide in their home to avoid a situation.
Quote: AxelWolfCan somebody a calculate the number of infections that will occur due to the large number of protesters gathering in Minneapolis?
No. And that is why it makes it difficult to establish public policy forbidding it.
Quote: AxelWolfCan somebody a calculate the number of infections that will occur due to the large number of protesters gathering in Minneapolis?
More infections than if there were no protests.
Quote: AxelWolfCan somebody a calculate the number of infections that will occur due to the large number of protesters gathering in Minneapolis?
0
Quote: MJGolfIn our state they have reopened the courthouse and a record number of evictions for past due rent have commenced. Sizeable number of foreclosures also BUT at least certain of mortgage holders are required to allow forbearance on those payments. My concern is the tenants (and also landlords). You can tack on payments to a mortgage; do a modification; extend the term; etc. But how do you do this on a lease? Not being politically correct but accurate, most renters will not have the wherewithal financially to make up or come up with three extra months rent payments. With a mortgage, at least you have an asset that is in play and some room to work. I doubt that our state is the only one with this situation on its hands.
There is probably a security deposit and last month's rent in play to blunt the hit to the landlord. They could force a new lease with "makeup" payments of whatever per month to recover some of it. In the end the market will determine it. In a tight market the tenant will need to come up with something (most are getting unemployment) or face eviction. In a loose market the landlord might eat it for a good tenant.
Quote: AZDuffman0
Have you seen the videos? From what I've seen there were hundreds of people there. Who knows how many people those hundreds have been in contact with in their homes alone. Stating that nobody will get infected as a result just seems absurd.
Quote: MintyHave you seen the videos? From what I've seen there were hundreds of people there. Who knows how many people those hundreds have been in contact with in their homes alone. Stating that nobody will get infected as a result just seems absurd.
Sick people would have stayed home. Previous large gatherings have not shown any infection. There has been no correlation in states opening and increased cases. NY is one of the most locked down states and has the most infections.
To imply that a demonstration or any kind of crowd is causing the end of the world is what is absurd.
Quote: AZDuffmanPrevious large gatherings have not shown any infection.
Took me about 35 seconds of extensive research to find just 3 examples of a gathering resulting in an outbreak. And each area turning into a hotspot
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/08/funeral-birthday-party-hugs-covid-19/%3foutputType=amp
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2020/5/6/21249308/coronavirus-cases-massachusetts-louisiana-reopening-hotspots
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/25/us/atlanta-lovett-school-coronavirus-outbreak/index.html
Quote: michael99000Took me about 35 seconds of extensive research to find just 3 examples of a gathering resulting in an outbreak. And each area turning into a hotspot
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/08/funeral-birthday-party-hugs-covid-19/%3foutputType=amp
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2020/5/6/21249308/coronavirus-cases-massachusetts-louisiana-reopening-hotspots
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/25/us/atlanta-lovett-school-coronavirus-outbreak/index.html
I stopped when I read the first one calling 16 people an "outbreak.." 16 people is nothing.
Quote: AZDuffmanI stopped when I read the first one calling 16 people an "outbreak.." 16 people is nothing.
It’s more than zero. Your posts in this thread are a parody of conservative talking points.
Quote: unJonIt’s more than zero. Your posts in this thread are a parody of conservative talking points.
You are missing the point why I said 0.
The point is people need to quit scaring themselves to death over normal human behavior. All the models were WRONG by a factor of 10 or more. Yet we have so many people want to stay locked down no matter how many problems it is causing because they are literally afraid to resume normal life. The do not care how many lives are destroyed in the name of saving even one life from the virus.
They need to be shown how absurd all of this sounds at this point. So they will get absurd replies to show it.
Quote: AZDuffmanYou are missing the point why I said 0.
The point is people need to quit scaring themselves to death over normal human behavior. All the models were WRONG by a factor of 10 or more. Yet we have so many people want to stay locked down no matter how many problems it is causing because they are literally afraid to resume normal life. The do not care how many lives are destroyed in the name of saving even one life from the virus.
They need to be shown how absurd all of this sounds at this point. So they will get absurd replies to show it.
So we can all agree your posts are absurd? Fair enough.
Good one.
Whether gloves or hands, you can still transmit it around until the gloves are removed, or hands washed.
But refusing to wear a mask around other people just makes you a stupid SOB. Since the purpose is to prevent your stupid ignorant ass from infecting other people. We know you don't care about your own health, I'll give you that.
Quote: billryanSo we can all agree your posts are absurd? Fair enough.
Mine make sense. I am not thinking the world will end if we do not wear masks. I am not saying it is worth a depression to hide from the virus. Most of the rest here not so much. Most want to hide in their homes for years if need be. Most do not care how many people suffer while we shut down. Most do not care how many lose their homes or businesses. They want to hide at home, thinking they are "safe."
Quote: AxelWolfCan somebody a calculate the number of infections that will occur due to the large number of protesters gathering in Minneapolis?
My guess is it should be similar to the number of infections that occurred due to all the other protests in recent months. Is there any reason to suggest differently?
Quote: AZDuffmanThat is a fragile *personal* situation, not a fragile economic situation. I would not say majority, but about 35-40%. We see articles on it a few times a year saying "40% could not handle a $400 emergency."
These people are facing disaster while those who can work from home insist we stay shut down because they want to stay home, afraid to go out. Some starve while others stuff themselves.
"Personal" situations can be economic situations. Larger economies are made up of the collection of all those smaller "personal" situations. If a high amount of those situations (you originally claimed "most", then adjusted to "35-40%), are fragile, the collection of them altogether is almost certainly also fragile. The only evidence you had that it was strong was the record high employment in February. The evidence that it was fragile, is how quickly that flipped to record high unemployment and economic hardships in March after such a short time responding to a national emergency and trying to contain a pandemic.
I was just trying to let people know there was a protest going on due to that other thing that we can't talk about because it might become political.
Quote: TomG"Personal" situations can be economic situations. Larger economies are made up of the collection of all those smaller "personal" situations. If a high amount of those situations (you originally claimed "most", then adjusted to "35-40%), are fragile, the collection of them altogether is almost certainly also fragile. The only evidence you had that it was strong was the record high employment in February. The evidence that it was fragile, is how quickly that flipped to record high unemployment and economic hardships in March after such a short time responding to a national emergency and trying to contain a pandemic.
Are you serious? It was "fragile" because it could not adjust to major, mandated shutdowns?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-virus-idUSKBN2370OQ
Quote: AxelWolfNew coronavirus losing potency, top Italian doctor says
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-virus-idUSKBN2370OQ
It sounds good until you ask yourself.
Why are we still seeing over s thousand dead per day in the USA?
And why is Brazil seeing 30,000 dead in just the last month?
There may be a strain in Italy that is losing potency but it's not the one here or in Brazil
Quote: darkozIt sounds good until you ask yourself.
Why are we still seeing over s thousand dead per day in the USA?
And why is Brazil seeing 30,000 dead in just the last month?
There may be a strain in Italy that is losing potency but it's not the one here or in Brazil
It's getting summer here. Winter in Brazil.
This virus is likely more robust than influenza. But it still doesn't like warmer conditions. That'll probably be a saving grace for India.
Quote: tringlomaneIt's getting summer here. Winter in Brazil.
This virus is likely more robust than influenza. But it still doesn't like warmer conditions. That'll probably be a saving grace for India.
June is their coldest month.
Usually about 66 degrees.
Not exactly freezing cold
The article via the link may be considered to have an attitude, but only so much as numbers and direct accurate quotes have an attitude.
https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot.com/2020/06/covid-19-reality-scorecard.html
Quote: AZDuffmanPA Turnpike, USA's first superhighway, just fired all their toll takers in favor of a cashless system. Temporary for the virus, they will never be called back. Time moves on.
I don't think it has anything to do with Covid-19
They did that in NYS last year.
It's the new thing.
Let's see
No more salary for toll takers ..
No more salary for cops to man the toll
No more salary for cleaners and toll gate mechanics
I see it sweeping the nation. Welcome to modern technology
Quote: darkozI don't think it has anything to do with Covid-19
They did that in NYS last year.
It's the new thing.
Let's see
No more salary for toll takers ..
No more salary for cops to man the toll
No more salary for cleaners and toll gate mechanics
I see it sweeping the nation. Welcome to modern technology
It does as x virus was the excuse. Was supposed to be just during lockdown. Pointing out how many things will not come back.
Guess what else won't be coming back? All the dead people who will die from a surge of outbreaks due to all the "protesting". Once those thugs go back to their Mommy and daddy's house(assuming they know their father) and then go visit Grandma. They've already demonstrated how dumb they are.Quote: AZDuffmanIt does as x virus was the excuse. Was supposed to be just during lockdown. Pointing out how many things will not come back.
This goes for all thugs of all Races and all colors.
Quote: AZDuffmanIt does as x virus was the excuse. Was supposed to be just during lockdown. Pointing out how many things will not come back.
The cashless system requires cameras installed to capture license plates of those without EZpass.
Those stored photos feed into the main system so that after the fact toll bills can be sent to the driver.
That's a major infrastructure installation and you think they just rigged it up on the fly due to Covid-19.
