charlie hebdoMy observation is that the US, which once was a world leader in the medical sciences and applications, now has the world's worst record of controlling this plague. So it's understandable that a certain crowd now tries to portray it as NBD.
All the medical experts can't even begin to counter the lack of caring for others, esp if it means 3 seconds of personal inconvenience.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
jcburns: I applaud your attempt at education. Unfortunately, based on his key terms, Larry's mind is made up. He clearly believes that the media is exaggerating the dangers of the Covid-19 pandemic for some ulterior motive.
My observation is that the US, which once was a world leader in the medical sciences and applications, now has the world's worst record of controlling this plague. So it's understandable that a certain crowd now tries to portray it as NBD.
EuclidSo I would like to hear the explanation of process that resolves all this points and questions.
Coming from a railfan board.
OK.
charlie hebdo Euclid: The most telling statistic is percentage of new testings that are positive (positive infection rate). In some states it has gone from 3-4% to nearly 20%. That is dramatic evidence of a pandemic out of control. OT look at positive cases per capita.
Euclid: The most telling statistic is percentage of new testings that are positive (positive infection rate). In some states it has gone from 3-4% to nearly 20%. That is dramatic evidence of a pandemic out of control. OT look at positive cases per capita.
I understand the need for per capita test results, but I don’t quite see how this can be made practical when testing a portion of the total population each day. The comparison is not in testing the same group at a time interval and seeing how quickly the rate of infection grows over time. That would require testing the same group over and over until no more infections are found.
So, they are testing a different group every day. But the groups are from different regions with different density of infection. So you test a low density group one day and a high density group sometime after. Assuming the groups sizes are the same, do you show an infection rate increase from testing the low density infected group one day and then the high density group sometime later? That would show an infection rate increase where there may be none.
All of this testing is supposed to be extrapolated to show the daily rate of infection for the entire population with selection of test subject selected by them requesting a test. How do you factor/adjust for the possibility that people asking for a test may expect that they have the virus? Aren’t they far more likely to be tested that those who do not expect they have the virus?
And also, when we find a new case of infection today, we have no idea when that person became infected. The infection may have begun 4 months ago. To filter that error out, you would have to be testing the same people repeatedly at intervals. So I would like to hear the explanation of process that resolves all these points of variation and the questions they raise.
Larry, I think one of the most destructive ideas out there is that there is this "they"—you're calling it the "mainstream media", some use even nastier terms. I think in part this is because 24 hour cable news has all these live interviews (basically, to take up time) with people tossing opinions out there.
But you have to keep clear that reporters—the ones on the White House beat, the ones covering hot spots overseas, the ones diving through bureaucratic paperwork, the ones interviewing people who have lost loved ones to the virus, these are not people with an agenda, other than tell the story: who, what, where, when, and why.
It's hard work, and when they do it right, it's what keeps our democracy safe and sane.
I worked (as a designer of sorts) for CNN and TBS in the early days. I've sat through dozens of news meetings. I swear to you the reporters and editors are in there figuring out how to tell what happened, how to be an honest broker of what happened. How to get it on the air first and fast. They are not bringing a political agenda into these meetings. I swear to you.
And I'll be the first to tell you I'm disappointed when CNN (like Fox and MSNBC) fills some of its hours with talking heads. Heads in boxes. That is not news reporting. But it's cheaper.
There is definitely a layer of stress added to reporters' jobs now that we have an administration that has figured out if you make stuff up, then people don't know what to believe.
I'm asking you to have faith that most of the people asking the President questions, trying to get a Senator or Congressperson on the record, these are good people who may be more liberal or more conservative in their personal beliefs, but they don't let that affect the basic reporting.
Who, what, when, where, how. It's not glamorous. It is essential. And it's essential we respect it.
These folks are not trying to keep you afraid...they're trying to keep you informed. It's harder to do when you call them names and don't trust them.
So let me just ask one more time: try to keep the commentator types—Hannity, Lemon, Maddow—separate from the reporters who are really working hard for you in a world that increasingly makes fun of them and diminishes their essential work.
In other words, they are now capturing that 60% of those infected who are asymptomatic.
The 60% number was found early on in two different situations - the USS Roosevelt, and a Boston homeless shelter.
Recovery estimates now range up to 99.75%.
Of course, that doesn't stop the MSM of making a big deal of someout outside the high risk groups getting sick, like kids. Of course, the kids that do get very sick are usually in a high risk group themselves.
Anything to keep us afraid.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
jcburnsI'm not calling you unsympathetic. I'm saying what you wrote was quite unsympathetic. I was encouraging you to be empathetic and care about your fellow human being.
I know I asked you earlier, but I want to ask again. What did I write that was unempathetic or unsympathetic?
York1 John
I asked my doctor if I gave up delicious food and all alcohol, would I live longer? He said, "No, but it will seem longer."
I did not know it needed parsing.
Do you need help parsing the sentence? I was talking about 400 years of this stuff. I've tried very hard to not screw over anyone, and I'm pretty sure I'm not anywhere near the top. Gonna keep trying.
jcburnsPut another way, I think pasty white guys (I am one) really screwed over anyone who wasn't the same gender and color as them on their way to the top. And once at the top, a sense of "well, I got mine" let them turn a blind eye to the suffering. They are suffering because someone hustling to the top shoved them out of the way.
So why did you do such a thing?
The Miami Herald has done some great reporting on this. In short, DeSantis has violated Florida open records laws by heavily redacting information and
The Pensacola News Journal reported in May: "The state of Florida is hiding information about coronavirus deaths from citizens. Under the direction of Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Florida Department of Health, the state has consistently refused to inform the public about deaths and infections in Florida nursing homes, prisons and now, coronavirus deaths as documented by public medical examiners."
He told the Herald that starting last Tuesday, due in part to the alarming rise in numbers, the state would return to reporting current hospitalization numbers. That hasn't happened yet.
You said "DeSantis prioritized looking after LTC facilities." He said that, but there's plenty of reporting to the contrary.
The whole thing of saying "the real scandal is in NY" when I'm talking about Florida is a tactic, a rhetorical way of looking away from the real failure in government. In Florida, that failure is right at the top.
York1 jcburns, I want to let you know that I appreciate your views even if I disagree with them. I hope I have not angered you. We can disagree and still appreciate each other's views.
jcburns,
I want to let you know that I appreciate your views even if I disagree with them. I hope I have not angered you.
We can disagree and still appreciate each other's views.
We can certainly disagree on our opinions.
I get nervous when I see people disagreeing on observable facts.
You have a right to your political point of view. I hope you'll keep an open eye to places where those pushing your politics have made things worse, not better.
I think we're entering an era where we need to find new ways of taking care of each other and maybe understanding that the ideas our country was founded on were not set up to take care of all people fairly or equitably. We have to be the country of ALL people, and I include the spectrum of class and income as much or more than that of race or gender.
Put another way, I think pasty white guys (I am one) really screwed over anyone who wasn't the same gender and color as them on their way to the top. And once at the top, a sense of "well, I got mine" let them turn a blind eye to the suffering. They are suffering because someone hustling to the top shoved them out of the way.
Throughout 400 years of history. And not just in the US. All colonizing countries and the colonized have some terrible, terrible tales they'd just as soon move past.
I'd sure like to change ALL of that. And I'm pretty certain that the people who need to lead in this effort are women and people of color. I have and will happily vote for as many of them as I can.
I think our current President is making a stark appeal to people who want time to be rolled back to...when? When was it good for everyone? He thinks a new garden of statuary packed with old white guys is a solution. A solution!
Holy moley.
jcburns Florida's governor is HIDING data that exists on nursing homes and assisted living.
Florida's governor is HIDING data that exists on nursing homes and assisted living.
Do you have proof of that? The real scandal in hiding data with respect to LTC facilities is NY where LTC facility residents who died after being transferred to hopsitals were not counted in the death tolls from long term care facilities.
FWIW,the federal government did tell the governors in early February that they needed to pay attention to LTC facilities and DeSantis prioritized looking after LTC facilities.
JPS1No rational analysis of the data is likely to persuade most people that the sky is not falling.
My point is that there is no data that supports the conclusion about there being a spike or second wave. You cannot show a trend without a sample across time or distance. You certainly cannot show a trend across time or distance if you are continuously increasing your sampling rate.
(Deep breath.)
OK, I've said it before, and now I'll say it again.
There's no grand conspiracy, there's no ulterior motives, there's no anything. What there is is a lot of very, very frightened people in positions of authority who NEVER expected to have to deal with an emergency of this nature.* They're running scared and don't know what else to do. The experts aren't much help, the theorys, projections, and predictions change from day to day. Obviously the experts never expected to have to deal with something like this either.
So in the meantime, wear your mask, it won't kill you and will make those around you feel a lot better. Be patient. Ride out the storm. It will end eventually.
* Just a corollary. Ever read any military history? If you have you know there's plenty of examples in the past of men who made very good peacetime commanders but who couldn't rise to the occasion when the shooting started. That's when the good wartime commanders came out of the "woodwork" and took over. Think of that when you think of the reactions of officials around the country when any kind of crisis strikes.
Managing business as usual is one thing. Managing havoc is something else.
Euclid SMOKE & MIRRORS: We are in a new trend of reversing the reopening of the economy. It appears that some states never really intended to reopen the economy. We see this in the original goal of flattening the curve evolving into a new goal of total containment. We see it in the simple reopening being subject to a complicated formula of rules and procedures spread out in many phases over a period of months at least. The Governor of Michigan has said that there is no way of knowing when the State will be completely reopened. Now, finally to kill the reopening, we are being told of tens of thousands of new cases per day claimed to represent a tremendous spike in new cases to a level many times higher than ever before. We are being assured of this conclusion even though we have no idea what the previous rates of new cases per day were before the massive testing. At this time many are concluding that the number of new cases per day is dramatically increasing. But we don’t know whether the number of actual new infections is increasing or if it been this high since six months ago. For all we know, the new-case-per-day count is actually falling rather that rising. It does not make any difference, however, because the hysterical narrative is driving the policy. If you increase the amount of testing each day, and have no base line to compare to, there is no way to conclude that the actual number of new cases materializing each day is rising. Cases found by testing today may have originated last January and persisted without symptoms.
SMOKE & MIRRORS:
We are in a new trend of reversing the reopening of the economy. It appears that some states never really intended to reopen the economy. We see this in the original goal of flattening the curve evolving into a new goal of total containment. We see it in the simple reopening being subject to a complicated formula of rules and procedures spread out in many phases over a period of months at least. The Governor of Michigan has said that there is no way of knowing when the State will be completely reopened.
Now, finally to kill the reopening, we are being told of tens of thousands of new cases per day claimed to represent a tremendous spike in new cases to a level many times higher than ever before. We are being assured of this conclusion even though we have no idea what the previous rates of new cases per day were before the massive testing.
At this time many are concluding that the number of new cases per day is dramatically increasing. But we don’t know whether the number of actual new infections is increasing or if it been this high since six months ago. For all we know, the new-case-per-day count is actually falling rather that rising.
It does not make any difference, however, because the hysterical narrative is driving the policy. If you increase the amount of testing each day, and have no base line to compare to, there is no way to conclude that the actual number of new cases materializing each day is rising. Cases found by testing today may have originated last January and persisted without symptoms.
Your ignorance of statistics is showing.
EuclidIt does not make any difference, however, because the hysterical narrative is driving the policy.
tree68 The "other candidate" in the last election thought they had several states wrapped up and didn't pay any attention to those states. In hindsight, that was not a wise decision, with the result we saw. This has been documented in a book on the topic. The election was conducted under the rules in effect at the time (and still in effect). The losers have been pushing changing the rules, but it's hard to get an answer if you ask what their reaction would be if the rules were changed and their candidate again loses, but would have won under the old rules... And it's hard to lead when the less-than-loyal opposition (and their MSM minions) fights you at every turn. This POTUS could say the sky is blue and his opponents would find a way to find fault with the statement. IMHO, we could have elected a cross between Mr. Rogers and Walter Cronkite and things would have played out exactly the same. This all has little to do with the specific person who was elected and more to do with the political party that person identifies with.
The "other candidate" in the last election thought they had several states wrapped up and didn't pay any attention to those states. In hindsight, that was not a wise decision, with the result we saw. This has been documented in a book on the topic.
The election was conducted under the rules in effect at the time (and still in effect). The losers have been pushing changing the rules, but it's hard to get an answer if you ask what their reaction would be if the rules were changed and their candidate again loses, but would have won under the old rules...
And it's hard to lead when the less-than-loyal opposition (and their MSM minions) fights you at every turn. This POTUS could say the sky is blue and his opponents would find a way to find fault with the statement.
IMHO, we could have elected a cross between Mr. Rogers and Walter Cronkite and things would have played out exactly the same. This all has little to do with the specific person who was elected and more to do with the political party that person identifies with.
Partisan tribalism certainly plays a role, but to ascribe the situation entirely to that is to ignore exactly how different an animal Trump is. No president in my lifetime even comes close in terms of a deliberate effort to flout the norms of presidential behavior in every way.
i had never voted Democratic for president until Trump came along, mostly for foreign and trade policy reasons. Trump has turned Reagan's foreign and trade policy on its head, and the Republican Party is now the party of protectionism and isolationism.
I'll be happy to vote Republican again some day, if they ever recover from the Trump takeover.
Finally, please spare me the "less-than-loyal opposition" bit. The Right treated Obama exactly the same way during his time in office. Imagine, if you will, the reaction from Faux Nooz if it was reported that US intel agencies had information that the Russians paid the Taleban to kill US soldiers and Obama's reaction was basically "no one told me."
York1 BaltACD The cows voted for a loser, in mind, body and spirit. Don't tell them that. I won't get any sleep tonight when they start making noise upset at what you said.
BaltACD The cows voted for a loser, in mind, body and spirit.
Don't tell them that. I won't get any sleep tonight when they start making noise upset at what you said.
Had part of one for dinner!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
There is actually a brief Amtrak reference in the SNL clip I linked. So I guess that kinda sorta adds a tiny bit of railroad content back into this trainforsaken thread.
We would all do well to remember that we have far more in common than that which divides us.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Thanks, Dude! I'm glad this forum lets all of us with differing views still be friends with our shared love of railroads.
York1 By the way, my 7:07 p.m. post was my 1776th post!
By the way, my 7:07 p.m. post was my 1776th post!
Very appropriate for the day!
For the record, I'm what many of your Republicans would consider a hardline leftist (I support universal health care, among other things) and I thought the PMSNBC joke was hilarious!
SNL should do more of their 'Morning Joe' parody bits. Alex Moffat and Kate McKinnon slay as Joe and Mika!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ynfBTfpJlU
I know, I know, I say I'm quitting, and then I post again.
I don't want to let this go.
jcburnsI'm not calling you unsympathetic. I'm saying what you wrote was quite unsympathetic.
Can you quote the post where I wrote something that was either unsympathetic or unempathetic?
I've looked back through my posts, and I honestly don't know where your comment comes from.
I'm not calling you unsympathetic. I'm saying what you wrote was quite unsympathetic. I was encouraging you to be empathetic and care about your fellow human being. That doesn't imply you're not doing that...if you are, great! Do more! Let it leak into your forum posts! Glad to hear it.
By the way, a guy MSNBC has on as an "analyst" (even when they pay him) is NOT the network saying it. I don't like any of these analyst people showing up as generic interviewees on ANY channel. It's crap television. But they're just one voice. Treat him or her accordingly.
jcburnsNo, you've made plenty in one email. A guy commenting on MSNBC is not the network saying it.
"Glenn L. Kirschner is an NBC/MSNBC legal analyst.."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Kirschner
jcburnsA guy on this forum calling it the Trump virus is not "the media" doing that.
I didn't say "the media" called it the Trump virus. Here's my quote:
York1We don't need blue print calling it the 'Trump Virus'.
Check out the color of the posts.
I think it's time I quit this folderol. I've upset enough people.
The only thing that upsets me in these posts is that someone calls me unempathetic without even knowing me or what I do. They have no idea what I do in my community. They have no idea how many hours I spent away from my family dealing with people who needed help. This accusation is made strictly on my choice of a candidate and by my calling MSNBC 'PMSNBC'.
Have a good evening, everyone. Happy 4th of July!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.