Fear and Loathing, a Rat Flu Odyssey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

True.
But the Chelsea was random people in the street.
Testing by mass general. Legit.

But 200is a small sample size.

Test results in minutes. That was cool to hear.

---

If it's representative that would mean almost 16 unconfirmed cases for every confirmed one. Which seems only slightly high compared to the general guess of 10:1, and it should be expected to be a little higher in a hotspot. Would be interesting to know how many of those tested have had (or will have) symptoms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bunion 2020

Did you ever engage Ron in the Global Warming thread?

He is an idiot or a troll. Either way, please don't quote him/it.

---

Got it, loud and clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

You sure it's not you? Looks like you.

---

That’s how I look on the inside

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

True.
But the Chelsea was random people in the street.
Testing by mass general. Legit.

But 200is a small sample size.

Test results in minutes. That was cool to hear.

---

Yeah nothing really spikes the bs meter on that one except that it was done completely in Chelsea and they have the highest infection rate in the state and crowding and poverty are why. It's a lot better than it was but it's still Chelsea.

I keep hearing that we need "massive" testing to determine how prevalent it is and that's just not true. Statistical modeling is a real thing. 5000 truly random tests and a reasonable model could be built. shit maybe 2500.

I didn’t make it to the end of his article multitasking over here. But if JFK Jr.’s first point is correct, that only 1,000 die in the US every year from regular influenza, it would would answer a lot of questions.
Or did I read that wrong? Or is he known crack smoker?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

Might be time for a pay per view cage match between Sanjay Gupta and RFK Jr.

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/n...-sanjay-gupta/

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

They don't know for sure yet. The general feeling is that antibodies will confer immunity but there are some instances that seem to point the other way. But because of the slow mutation of the virus, if it antibodies do confer immunity it should be long- lasting immunity. In theory.

---

It seems to me that basing reopening or at least letting some segments of the population go back to "normal" on immunity that may not exist is sketchy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gravitylover

It seems to me that basing reopening or at least letting some segments of the population go back to "normal" on immunity that may not exist is sketchy.

---

That’s not the point. Even that many antibodies is not enough for herd immunity.
But it does help understand that this is a bit worse than flu but not an Ebola.

We were supposed to pound the mound or flatten the curve to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed.
Most hospitals are not overwhelmed.
So let’s ease off the brake a bit in regions where it’s not so bad.
If it gets bad again then clamp down again.
But town by town and county by county

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rideski

I didn’t make it to the end of his article multitasking over here. But if JFK Jr.’s first point is correct, that only 1,000 die in the US every year from regular influenza, it would would answer a lot of questions.
Or did I read that wrong? Or is he known crack smoker?

---

He's a nut. Excluding all pneumonia deaths from flu death totals, when the people who die from the flu almost always die because of pneumonia they caught/developed because they were weak and sick with the flu, is ridiculous. It's like saying nobody does from car wrecks, they die from impact injuries suffered after the wrecks.

Bummer, but thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ron johnson

And I'm not blaming everything on the Fed. I say they are a huge problem because they create the environment for these bubbles to grow and incentivize risky business practices.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ron johnson

Have you ever heard of the Depression of 1920? I'm guessing not since the gov't did the opposite of what you advocate and the market recovered quickly on its own.

https://mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920

---

Meh, arguing with internet Austrians is a waste of time. I studied economics, undergrad engineering grad school econ, and referencing mises.org is a clown show. I have read about the recession of 1920, appropriately viewed as a post–World War I recession (at the time everything was called a depression before the Great Depression). In fact, Hoover's policies were initially based on the 1920 event but it didn't work. I could explain why but I doubt anyone cares.

Internet Austrian's who reference mises don't know what they don't know, and they really don't understand the Austrian viewpoint when it comes to the Fed. I could explain prices, NGDP, M1, M2, etc. but it's pointless because you don't have the background to understand it, it involves math, and I'm not interested in arguing.

Besides, there's literature on pandemics so when I write the risk of "economic collapse the results of which can persist for decades," it's not just some offhand comment.



For anyone else, this whole thing started with Ron's idea that we should just let business fail because they failed to plan for a pandemic. The problem with that idea is people are valuable and not interchangeable so you needlessly destroy a lot of human capital, and wiping out equity capital ignores how important the capitalization of large enterprises really is.

Wipe out Boeing, for example, and there's a good chance America stops making large commercial aircraft. Wipe out banks and then you have to figure out how to recapitalize the economy. The century old plan of "let all the equity be destroyed" slows down the rate at which you recapitalize—which gets back to the risk of decades long recovery.

People might not like the Fed, or Banks, or even Boeing but that's just an attitude not dispassionate analysis. There's a world of difference between improving those institutions and letting them be destroyed.

We might be using a system that porn stars pioneered to prove they were clean.

Unlikely Model for H.I.V. Prevention: Adult Film Industry https://nyti.ms/YxvOvi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

Meh, arguing with internet Austrians is a waste of time. I studied economics, undergrad engineering grad school econ, and referencing mises.org is a clown show. I have read about the recession of 1920 even though it was mostly a non-event (at the time everything was called a depression before the Great Depression). In fact, Hoover's policies were based on the 1920 event but it didn't work. I could explain why but I doubt anyone cares.

Internet Austrian's who reference mises don't know what they don't know, and they really don't understand the Austrian viewpoint when it comes to the Fed. I could explain prices, NGDP, M1, M2, etc. but it's pointless because you don't have the background to understand it, it involves math, and I'm not interested in arguing.

Besides, there's literature on pandemics so when I write the risk of "economic collapse the results of which can persist for decades," it's not just some offhand comment.



For anyone else, this whole thing started with Ron's idea that we should just let business fail because they failed to plan for a pandemic. The problem with that idea is people are valuable and not interchangeable so you needlessly destroy a lot human capital, and wiping out equity capital ignores how important the capitalization of large enterprises really is.

Wipe out Boeing, for example, and there's a good chance America stops making large commercial aircraft. Wipe out banks and then you have to figure out how to recapitalize the economy. The century old plan of "let all the equity be destroyed" slows down the rate at which you recapitalize—which gets back to the risk of decades long recovery.

People might not like the Fed, or Banks, or even Boeing but that's just an attitude not dispassionate analysis. There's a world of difference between improving those institutions and letting them be destroyed.

---

Therefore we should have a lot more regulations and say over how they do business. Privatizing all of the profit and making the risk 100% public sucks too. Why should the execs be allowed to keep their toys while main Street gets slaughtered? Ron's a fucking idiot, however there are a few viable kernels of corn in the shit he is peddling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by riser3

Privatizing all of the profit and making the risk 100% public sucks too.

---

I agree, moral hazard exists and it's big problem with the American banking system, but this is not a moral hazard event. The big reason I've been so disgusted with our response is because all the unforced errors has put us in the situation. If the virus is managed, the sooner the better, then equity values would/will bounce back on their own.

The problem with the word 'bailout' is we really don't have a good definition for what that is. 2008 sucked, and it destroyed a lot of people's faith in democracy and capitalism. There's a danger though in viewing this event through that lens, we don't want to cut off our nose to spite our face.

As someone who has studied this stuff, people have been really bad at preparing for rare events, for black swans, long before the Fed and bailouts were a thing. There's good reason to be pessimistic about our ability to respond to pending future disasters. Often, people are unwilling to act until the very last moment, if even that. It's endemic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gravitylover

So what's the real deal with antibody testing and such? If a person has had the disease and developed the antibodies are they actually immune or is that just theory based on that's the way it is with some other viruses? Will it be chronic like some others?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

They don't know for sure yet. The general feeling is that antibodies will confer immunity but there are some instances that seem to point the other way. But because of the slow mutation of the virus, if it antibodies do confer immunity it should be long- lasting immunity. In theory.

---

Short layman explanation in 2nd and 3rd paragraphs here, from an antibody test that started shipping out this week:

https://www.abbott.com/corpnewsroom/...body-test.html

I know someone who worked on this, she says the company had people working three shifts, sever days a week and compressed normal nine to 12 months lead time into 6-8 weeks. Really impressive story.

My wife, 9 month old and I have come down with respiratory coughs and high fevers, body aches, headaches. Took the baby in yesterday to get her checked out. The nurse was pretty adamant we not test the baby or myself. This is the test center in my town, a resort area that got hammered early and hard - 503 cases in ~50k population.

The nurse said 1) the tests suck, only about 70% accurate so many false positives and negatives; 2) we're low risk, young and healthy; 3) it doesn't matter anyways - go home, self-quarantine until 3 days of no symptoms, get good sleep, eat well. That's great advice, except the baby, that's also teething, decided she would rather cry all night long and now we feel even more like dog shit.

We've been isolating for a month now and taking precautions when we have had to venture out. So maybe we have it? Maybe not? The local testing clinic didn't seem to care.

I do find it entertaining that a bunch of internet sleuths can read and interpret this articles and reach pretty definitive conclusions, while all the trained MDs, epidemiologists and public health experts have no clue.

I have a pretty good understanding of public health, virology, and epidemiology (I only did it for 40 years, but what do I know) and I can't even come close to being definitive.

I will continue to listen to the people who know more then I do, not less. Trump has no clue what he is talking about, soshould just STFU, as should coreshot.

The thing that makes me suspicious about the test results is the reliability of the tests themselves.

If there were so many reliable tests, why can't we get some?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tips^Up

My wife, 9 month old and I have come down with respiratory coughs and high fevers, body aches, headaches. Took the baby in yesterday to get her checked out. The nurse was pretty adamant we not test the baby or myself. This is the test center in my town, a resort area that got hammered early and hard - 503 cases in ~50k population.

The nurse said 1) the tests suck, only about 70% accurate so many false positives and negatives; 2) we're low risk, young and healthy; 3) it doesn't matter anyways - go home, self-quarantine until 3 days of no symptoms, get good sleep, eat well. That's great advice, except the baby, that's also teething, decided she would rather cry all night long and now we feel even more like dog shit.

We've been isolating for a month now and taking precautions when we have had to venture out. So maybe we have it? Maybe not? The local testing clinic didn't seem to care.

---

Again, maybe they're being honest about the reliability of the tests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nobody Famous

Short layman explanation in 2nd and 3rd paragraphs here, from an antibody test that started shipping out this week:

https://www.abbott.com/corpnewsroom/...body-test.html

I know someone who worked on this, she says the company had people working three shifts, sever days a week and compressed normal nine to 12 months lead time into 6-8 weeks. Really impressive story.

---

That’s awesome.

Any idea how they will be distributed? Through doctors or will they be setting up places (like drive thrus) where people can get tested?

A GF (yes another friend of which I have many, this one is not a Trump supporter) was at the grocery store in Tri-Cities dutifully wearing a mask and trying to avoid people who were getting too up close and personal.

One man in particular is closer than she was comfortable with so she asks him to step away. He huffs and walks off sidling up to a woman buying apples and the following conversation ensues:

Guy: Are you doing the six foot thing?
Woman: No. It's all so stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KQ

Thanks FC. He will be missed.

and now for something a little lighter. He would have liked this:

Melania Trump Tested People With A White House Puzzle. It Did Not Go Well.

---

Trump does claim "we have the best tests"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gravitylover

Is anybody watching this press conference? Fucking moron can't stop spewing some of the dumbest shit to ever come out of a presidents mouth. :(

---

He checks the ratings. So no.

Stopped watch quite awile ago. He says the same stupid shit each time, basically just a Trump rally. I would watch to hear what the experts say, but they don't get to say much and the ratio of Trump oral diarrhea to facts is way to high to tolerate.

It will be interesting to see if these protests swell in numbers. Might be like that call to arms the Bundy's put out up in Oregon when the occupied the refuge, and got zip. Or not. But, if it's only a few whacks carrying guns, then Trump has to worry. Either way, I'm guessing middle America is fucked in a month. Invest in refrigerated trucks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buster Highmen

The thing that makes me suspicious about the test results is the reliability of the tests themselves.

If there were so many reliable tests, why can't we get some?

---

Exactly! Without knowing massive amounts of information one can not easily interpret such results. What are the sensitivity and specificity of the tests? What antigen or antibody are they resting for? what are the cross reactivity rates with other ag/abs? While I can generally read the abstract and results section of a properly written science article to decide if it is worth reading, but I absolutely have to read the methods and materials section before even considering its validity. Ince I have all that, then I will dive into the actual data. All that is hard enough to do in my own field, let alone something this complex. All my education and years of experience has taught me to know what I don't know. A lesson a few around d here should learn.