Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
By "oversight" you mean government bureaucrats micromanaging corporations. That's called socialism, or fascism, to be more accurate. That's the last thing any sane person wants. When has government ever demonstrated competence in running a business?Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
You know what I find interesting? How you seem to be physically unable to have a decent argument. When someone takes your OP seriously enough to read your link, then do some research to find out how the people you linked conducted their investigation. Then takes out the time to write a response that doesn't even completely disagrees with your premise. To then call this person a moron seems not a little bit disrespectful. If you want to just spend your time on this board trolling that's fine by me.Check out the stats from Iceland I posted, moron, where everyone is tested. They have 802 cases and 2 deaths. That works out to a fatality rate of 0.249%.So I've read up about your source. What happened is that they extrapolated the number of infected in one village population 3000 to an entire country. The result are intriguing but these professors themselves admitted not remotely conclusive. The reason why should be obvious. To use as your benchmark data from one village is too limited. What if the village was lucky enough to not have many infected and such a small base number means even a few more or less infected people means a huge statistical difference.This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
As far as I know all medical professionals agree that 2 to 4 percent is high because all recognize that confirmed cases don't equal actual cases. But trying to use that fact to try to compare this thing to swine flu (mortality 0.02) or common flu (mortality 0.1) simply doesn't match what we see on the ground. No swine- or common flu- has ever been able to overwhelm the capacity of a country's capacity to deal with it.
Case closed.
All you did is continue to defend your lame-ass position. Go post in the flame zone yourself. Your promoting hysteria, and anyone who does that will get both barrels from me. If you don't like being criticized, then find another forum.You know what I find interesting? How you seem to be physically unable to have a decent argument. When someone takes your OP seriously enough to read your link, then do some research to find out how the people you linked conducted their investigation. Then takes out the time to write a response that doesn't even completely disagrees with your premise. To then call this person a moron seems not a little bit disrespectful. If you want to just spend your time on this board trolling that's fine by me.Check out the stats from Iceland I posted, moron, where everyone is tested. They have 802 cases and 2 deaths. That works out to a fatality rate of 0.249%.So I've read up about your source. What happened is that they extrapolated the number of infected in one village population 3000 to an entire country. The result are intriguing but these professors themselves admitted not remotely conclusive. The reason why should be obvious. To use as your benchmark data from one village is too limited. What if the village was lucky enough to not have many infected and such a small base number means even a few more or less infected people means a huge statistical difference.This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
As far as I know all medical professionals agree that 2 to 4 percent is high because all recognize that confirmed cases don't equal actual cases. But trying to use that fact to try to compare this thing to swine flu (mortality 0.02) or common flu (mortality 0.1) simply doesn't match what we see on the ground. No swine- or common flu- has ever been able to overwhelm the capacity of a country's capacity to deal with it.
Case closed.
But do me a favor, post in the flame zone than.
This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
I'll tell you what. Why don't you go to New York City and tell them that?
Why do you think the math would be different because he's talking to someone in NYC?
A trick of the statistical arts ... restrict our sample pool and drive up the percentages ... do you want 90% of $100 or 5% of a million? ...
So few have been tested, and only those at risk ... the death rate is a statistic that can only be calculated after-the-fact ... there's not enough data right now to say whether Covid-19 is worse than the season flu or not ... wash you hands, stop letting people sneeze in your mouth and stop with the licking posts ... common sense hygiene ...
Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
"Prove it! Prove it! Prove it! I don't have to prove anything, go Google how right I am!" is another way of saying, "I have no proof! I just want to believe this!" Don't even get me started on the lame-ass broken link.
Debate over. You lost. Run along.
By "oversight" you mean government bureaucrats micromanaging corporations. That's called socialism, or fascism, to be more accurate. That's the last thing any sane person wants. When has government ever demonstrated competence in running a business?Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
Your claim about abstinence only education is a fantasy.
By "oversight" you mean government bureaucrats micromanaging corporations. That's called socialism, or fascism, to be more accurate. That's the last thing any sane person wants. When has government ever demonstrated competence in running a business?Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
Your claim about abstinence only education is a fantasy.
This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
I'll tell you what. Why don't you go to New York City and tell them that?
Why do you think the math would be different because he's talking to someone in NYC?
Yeah, the math IS different in an Epicenter.
Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
"Prove it! Prove it! Prove it! I don't have to prove anything, go Google how right I am!" is another way of saying, "I have no proof! I just want to believe this!" Don't even get me started on the lame-ass broken link.
Debate over. You lost. Run along.
I gave you the link, your bitchness. Cute little hissy fit, but I provided the link you demanded.
i provided the link. The GOP wanted money for abstinence only education....and they got it.
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
The link worked fine and so did the 2nd one. Abstinence only education was included in the stimulus.Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
"Prove it! Prove it! Prove it! I don't have to prove anything, go Google how right I am!" is another way of saying, "I have no proof! I just want to believe this!" Don't even get me started on the lame-ass broken link.
Debate over. You lost. Run along.
I gave you the link, your bitchness. Cute little hissy fit, but I provided the link you demanded.
Your link is bogus, Your Dodginess. Doesn't work. And there's nothing cute about your hypocrisy and deflection.
www.foxnews.com
The link worked fine and so did the 2nd one. Abstinence only education was included in the stimulus.Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
"Prove it! Prove it! Prove it! I don't have to prove anything, go Google how right I am!" is another way of saying, "I have no proof! I just want to believe this!" Don't even get me started on the lame-ass broken link.
Debate over. You lost. Run along.
I gave you the link, your bitchness. Cute little hissy fit, but I provided the link you demanded.
Your link is bogus, Your Dodginess. Doesn't work. And there's nothing cute about your hypocrisy and deflection.
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
The extension of funding for abstinence education is reportedly seen by Democrats as a favor to Republicans' constituents, similarly to how Republicans criticized elements in the House Democrats stimulus proposal, including funding for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, as...
The link worked fine and so did the 2nd one. Abstinence only education was included in the stimulus.Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
"Prove it! Prove it! Prove it! I don't have to prove anything, go Google how right I am!" is another way of saying, "I have no proof! I just want to believe this!" Don't even get me started on the lame-ass broken link.
Debate over. You lost. Run along.
I gave you the link, your bitchness. Cute little hissy fit, but I provided the link you demanded.
Your link is bogus, Your Dodginess. Doesn't work. And there's nothing cute about your hypocrisy and deflection.
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
The extension of funding for abstinence education is reportedly seen by Democrats as a favor to Republicans' constituents, similarly to how Republicans criticized elements in the House Democrats stimulus proposal, including funding for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, as...
The link worked fine and so did the 2nd one. Abstinence only education was included in the stimulus.Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
"Prove it! Prove it! Prove it! I don't have to prove anything, go Google how right I am!" is another way of saying, "I have no proof! I just want to believe this!" Don't even get me started on the lame-ass broken link.
Debate over. You lost. Run along.
I gave you the link, your bitchness. Cute little hissy fit, but I provided the link you demanded.
Your link is bogus, Your Dodginess. Doesn't work. And there's nothing cute about your hypocrisy and deflection.
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
The extension of funding for abstinence education is reportedly seen by Democrats as a favor to Republicans' constituents, similarly to how Republicans criticized elements in the House Democrats stimulus proposal, including funding for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, as...
No, the first link didn't work.
As far as your "Look, ABSTINENCE! How DARE they!" fauxrage: there continues to be the question, assiduously avoided by you, about the vast amounts of pork the Democrats have shoved and keep shoving into this bill. Do you really think you're going to be able to put us onto the defensive with your accusations of "ABSTINENCE! Such WASTE!" sufficient to deflect from that?
I'm not surprised that Republicans countered with an agenda item of their own in response to Pelosi's shameless attempts to leverage the virus for her insane wishlist. At least the Republican agenda item has some vague connection to the need for social distancing. What's your excuse for how airline emission standards connect to this emergency?
Time for YOU to start answering some questions, instead of pretending that you just get to fire them out to others.
The link worked fine and so did the 2nd one. Abstinence only education was included in the stimulus.Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
"Prove it! Prove it! Prove it! I don't have to prove anything, go Google how right I am!" is another way of saying, "I have no proof! I just want to believe this!" Don't even get me started on the lame-ass broken link.
Debate over. You lost. Run along.
I gave you the link, your bitchness. Cute little hissy fit, but I provided the link you demanded.
Your link is bogus, Your Dodginess. Doesn't work. And there's nothing cute about your hypocrisy and deflection.
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
The extension of funding for abstinence education is reportedly seen by Democrats as a favor to Republicans' constituents, similarly to how Republicans criticized elements in the House Democrats stimulus proposal, including funding for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, as...
No, the first link didn't work.
As far as your "Look, ABSTINENCE! How DARE they!" fauxrage: there continues to be the question, assiduously avoided by you, about the vast amounts of pork the Democrats have shoved and keep shoving into this bill. Do you really think you're going to be able to put us onto the defensive with your accusations of "ABSTINENCE! Such WASTE!" sufficient to deflect from that?
I'm not surprised that Republicans countered with an agenda item of their own in response to Pelosi's shameless attempts to leverage the virus for her insane wishlist. At least the Republican agenda item has some vague connection to the need for social distancing. What's your excuse for how airline emission standards connect to this emergency?
Time for YOU to start answering some questions, instead of pretending that you just get to fire them out to others.
Look how adorable you are! “Yeah, well, but”...is that you trying to deflect? Why, yes, I think it is!
So, are we gonna have that discussion now about how both sides got a little “sumpin’ sumpin’ “ outta the stimulus?
The link worked fine and so did the 2nd one. Abstinence only education was included in the stimulus.Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
"Prove it! Prove it! Prove it! I don't have to prove anything, go Google how right I am!" is another way of saying, "I have no proof! I just want to believe this!" Don't even get me started on the lame-ass broken link.
Debate over. You lost. Run along.
I gave you the link, your bitchness. Cute little hissy fit, but I provided the link you demanded.
Your link is bogus, Your Dodginess. Doesn't work. And there's nothing cute about your hypocrisy and deflection.
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
The extension of funding for abstinence education is reportedly seen by Democrats as a favor to Republicans' constituents, similarly to how Republicans criticized elements in the House Democrats stimulus proposal, including funding for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, as...
No, the first link didn't work.
As far as your "Look, ABSTINENCE! How DARE they!" fauxrage: there continues to be the question, assiduously avoided by you, about the vast amounts of pork the Democrats have shoved and keep shoving into this bill. Do you really think you're going to be able to put us onto the defensive with your accusations of "ABSTINENCE! Such WASTE!" sufficient to deflect from that?
I'm not surprised that Republicans countered with an agenda item of their own in response to Pelosi's shameless attempts to leverage the virus for her insane wishlist. At least the Republican agenda item has some vague connection to the need for social distancing. What's your excuse for how airline emission standards connect to this emergency?
Time for YOU to start answering some questions, instead of pretending that you just get to fire them out to others.
Look how adorable you are! “Yeah, well, but”...is that you trying to deflect? Why, yes, I think it is!
So, are we gonna have that discussion now about how both sides got a little “sumpin’ sumpin’ “ outta the stimulus?
I'll take that as a "Run away before I have to answer!"
The link worked fine and so did the 2nd one. Abstinence only education was included in the stimulus.Not breaking newBreaking News! BriPat doesn't think enough people are dying! Go away Russian troll!
So you aren't concerned about the virus?This is what I've been saying all along, and the TDS morons have been trying to ignore. Their claims that the Wuhan flu is more deadly than the Swine flu is based on psuedo-science. It's based on figures that are clearly biased.
Is coronavirus less fatal than early predictions suggested?
Coronavirus is an icky disease that takes a cruel toll on the elderly, the sick, and the unlucky. In this modern era, we can outwit many things that once routinely killed people, but the Grim Reaper is still out there and he’ll eventually get all of us. Scary headlines have hinted that coronavirus is now the Grim Reaper's preferred method.
Media reports have told us that coronavirus is significantly more deadly than the flu, which annually kills 30,000 to 60,000 Americans. Based on the speed with which it killed in China, Italy, Iran, and Spain, it looked as if the American death toll could easily top two million people annually. While that’s small potatoes compared to past pandemics (e.g., the Plague of Justinian, the Black Death, the Spanish Influenza), it’s a staggering toll in modern America. Any actions seemed worthwhile to America from turn into a viral slaughterhouse.
But that might not be what's happening.
At the Wall Street Journal (behind a paywall), Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya, two medical professors at Stanford, propose that we’re using the wrong math and that we are still missing the numbers we need to do the math correctly. However, by extrapolating from available data, one can argue that coronavirus’s mortality rate is significantly lower than the early estimates.
According to the doctors, “The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.” When calculating the mortality rate, while we know the numerator (the number who have died), we’re using the wrong denominator. If the denominator is only those sick enough to get the test in the first place, that small number will return a much higher mortality rate.
The real denominator should be the total number of people who catch this contagious virus.
Have you volunteered at you local Emergency Center yet? Someone as unconcerned about the virus as you are should be on the front lines fighting it.
I'm very concerned. You aren't. You should volunteer to help fight the virus on the "front lines". I am following recommended guidelines and staying home or only going to my workplace or grocery store.
Tell us how concerned you are when your leaders aren't wasting time trying to use the virus to advance their political agenda, and you aren't making excuses for them doing it.
When I see your hypocritical ass demanding to know what funding for the arts and airplane emissions standards have to do with the coronavirus, we'll talk.
Sure, we can talk about those if you'd also like to talk about the massive corporate bailout with no oversight for corporations too. Or how about Republicans tacking on provisions about abstinence only education. Can't have one discussion without the other.
I'd be happy to talk about "the massive corporate bailout with no oversight". It didn't exist; it was a made-up talking point for you leftist zombies to parrot to give Pelosi and Company cover under which to demand their goody package.
I'll talk about "abstinence only education" just as soon as you show me some actual proof any such thing happened. Until then, the only thing I have to say about it is, "Seabiscuit claims it, so it must be so much horseshit."
Your turn, Sparkles. Let's see you post something other than, "Well, how about THIS accusation I made up, and THIS one, and don't notice that I ignored all your questions." I dare you.
Are you incapable of searching things on the internet? Google broken? Does being a dripping slit of a bitch render you incapable of research?
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
"Prove it! Prove it! Prove it! I don't have to prove anything, go Google how right I am!" is another way of saying, "I have no proof! I just want to believe this!" Don't even get me started on the lame-ass broken link.
Debate over. You lost. Run along.
I gave you the link, your bitchness. Cute little hissy fit, but I provided the link you demanded.
Your link is bogus, Your Dodginess. Doesn't work. And there's nothing cute about your hypocrisy and deflection.
Senate stimulus bill extends funding for abstinence education
The extension of funding for abstinence education is reportedly seen by Democrats as a favor to Republicans' constituents, similarly to how Republicans criticized elements in the House Democrats stimulus proposal, including funding for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, as...
No, the first link didn't work.
As far as your "Look, ABSTINENCE! How DARE they!" fauxrage: there continues to be the question, assiduously avoided by you, about the vast amounts of pork the Democrats have shoved and keep shoving into this bill. Do you really think you're going to be able to put us onto the defensive with your accusations of "ABSTINENCE! Such WASTE!" sufficient to deflect from that?
I'm not surprised that Republicans countered with an agenda item of their own in response to Pelosi's shameless attempts to leverage the virus for her insane wishlist. At least the Republican agenda item has some vague connection to the need for social distancing. What's your excuse for how airline emission standards connect to this emergency?
Time for YOU to start answering some questions, instead of pretending that you just get to fire them out to others.
Look how adorable you are! “Yeah, well, but”...is that you trying to deflect? Why, yes, I think it is!
So, are we gonna have that discussion now about how both sides got a little “sumpin’ sumpin’ “ outta the stimulus?
I'll take that as a "Run away before I have to answer!"
Run away from what? Stuff that wasn't in the final bill? Okay, let's talk about stuff that wasn't in the bill. Trump getting money for his businesses wasn't in the bill. Corporations being able to give themselves bonuses or buyback stock options while still repaying on the loan wasn't in the bill either.
Yeah, somebody thought that maybe if we were going to give airlines a bunch of free money that maybe they could get them to curb their carbon emissions. It's as tenuous a connection as abstinence only education...which IS in the bill whereas limits on airline carbon emissions is not.
Now maybe you can explain what any of this has to do with how transmittable or how deadly this virus is...
