• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Death projections are down from 90k to 80k now to 60k

S

Slavister

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
11,218
Reaction score
8,272
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Great news!

Within a week, US death projections from one of the models used widely (incl by White House) changed from 90k down to 80k and now to 60k.

Earlier range was 40k-180k. New range is 30k-120k.

This shows that stay-at-home measures, now applied to 97% of population, are working.

One explanation I read is that original models assumed 50% of people complied with stay-at-home orders and social distancing whereas in truth 90% do.

Let's keep pushing the projections down! Stay home and away from other people! You are literally saving lives when you do!
 
Last edited:
Cool, only twenty 9/11’s.
 
Slavister said:
Great news!

Within a week, US death projections from one of the models used widely (incl by White House) changed from 90k down to 80k and now to 60k.

Earlier range was 40k-180k. New range is 30k-120k.

This shows that stay-at-home measures, now applied to 97% of population, are working.

One explanation I read is that original models assumed 50% of people complied with stay-at-home orders and social distancing whereas in truth 90% do.

Let's keep pushing the projections down! Stay home and away from other people! You are literally saving lives when you do!
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) assertion is based on what, exactly? The only thing changed is the model prediction - while COVID-19 death numbers continue to increase.

Looked at another way, it cost $2.2T (so far) to (allegedly) save 10K to 60K lives.
 
Last edited:
Slavister said:
Great news!

Within a week, US death projections from one of the models used widely (incl by White House) changed from 90k down to 80k and now to 60k.

Earlier range was 40k-180k. New range is 30k-120k.

This shows that stay-at-home measures, now applied to 97% of population, are working.

One explanation I read is that original models assumed 50% of people complied with stay-at-home orders and social distancing whereas in truth 90% do.

Let's keep pushing the projections down! Stay home and away from other people! You are literally saving lives when you do!
Click to expand...

Yet reducing yer chances to get laid..
 
The experts didn't think we'd do the social distancing thing, but we have.
 
Slavister said:
Great news!

Within a week, US death projections from one of the models used widely (incl by White House) changed from 90k down to 80k and now to 60k.

Earlier range was 40k-180k. New range is 30k-120k.

This shows that stay-at-home measures, now applied to 97% of population, are working.

One explanation I read is that original models assumed 50% of people complied with stay-at-home orders and social distancing whereas in truth 90% do.

Let's keep pushing the projections down! Stay home and away from other people! You are literally saving lives when you do!
Click to expand...

Stay home and away from other people!
Click to expand...

Yeah, you should have seen everyone I saw at a popular hiking destination(LOL)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) assertion is based on what, exactly? The only thing changed is the model prediction - while COVID-19 death numbers continue to increase.
Click to expand...

The very next sentence tells you why the models are changing. That assertion is also based on experience of different countries (Italy + Spain) and different States (California and Washington vs New York and Louisiana) and different cities (San Francisco vs Los Angeles, Seattle vs New Orleans). Those are just very few examples. For everybody who missed the boat with testing like the US and some European countries, the only constant among different regions and states and cities is that those that closed down early are seeing much better numbers than those that did not.

P.S. Trump to this day opposes encouraging all States to close down. Good thing Governors and local officials come around to the same inevitable conclusion without waiting for him. Some faster than others.

Luther said:
Yeah, you should have seen everyone I saw at a popular hiking destination(LOL)
Click to expand...

If they live in separate houses (not sharing common door knobs and elevators), and stayed far away from each other, maybe that's fine. If not, they are killing people.

swing_voter said:
The experts didn't think we'd do the social distancing thing, but we have.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I said in the OP too.
 
Last edited:
I hope that as few people get sick as possible.
 
People are still reading tea leaves, eh?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) assertion is based on what, exactly? The only thing changed is the model prediction - while COVID-19 death numbers continue to increase.

Looked at another way, it cost $2.2T (so far) to save 10K to 60K lives.
Click to expand...

And there is "talk" of another Trillion.

Wow!
 
Slavister said:
Great news!

Within a week, US death projections from one of the models used widely (incl by White House) changed from 90k down to 80k and now to 60k.

Earlier range was 40k-180k. New range is 30k-120k.

This shows that stay-at-home measures, now applied to 97% of population, are working.

One explanation I read is that original models assumed 50% of people complied with stay-at-home orders and social distancing whereas in truth 90% do.

Let's keep pushing the projections down! Stay home and away from other people! You are literally saving lives when you do!
Click to expand...

You guys know you only get one shot at this, right? If the numbers are much lower than early projections -- and they certainly are going to be much, much lower -- then you've lost the narrative. You can scream "it worked!" all you want, but people feeling the residual economic effects are going to be unconvinced.

It's called crying wolf.

My prediction: There will never be another lockdown no matter how bad the next virus is.
 
While RAH-RAH is fun the reality is that these models have been powered with not enough data, and poor quality data.....we have been flying mostly blind.....which is really stupid.

We might just have bungled our way into a Depression.

In which case history will slaughter us.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) assertion is based on what, exactly? The only thing changed is the model prediction - while COVID-19 death numbers continue to increase.

Looked at another way, it cost $2.2T (so far) to save 10K to 60K lives.
Click to expand...
So what is your price per life?
 
Hawkeye10 said:
While RAH-RAH is fun the reality is that these models have been powered with not enough data, and poor quality data.....we have been flying mostly blind.....which is really stupid.

We might just have bungled our way into a Depression.

In which case history will slaughter us.
Click to expand...

I hope there's no depression. I hope we rebound quickly. But I intend to use this data to make the anti-statist case over and over and over again until the liberals' heads explode. I used to be an ally of liberal causes. Now I fear their authoritarian reflexes. I wonder how many people out there are seeing things my way?
 
Hawkeye10 said:
While RAH-RAH is fun the reality is that these models have been powered with not enough data, and poor quality data.....we have been flying mostly blind.....which is really stupid.
Click to expand...

I completely agree we have been flying mostly blind which makes all projects that much harder. Thanks to Trump's mismanagement and resulting lack of testing. South Korea and USA had the first case on the same day. Yet by March 9, they did a lot more tests, even accounting for population difference - 4100 per million for South Korea vs only 26 for US.

Hawkeye10 said:
We might just have bungled our way into a Depression.
Click to expand...

Yeah, or MORE LIKELY, we might have gotten away from a Depression after losing 2 millions of Americans in the process.

GhostlyJoe said:
You guys know you only get one shot at this, right? If the numbers are much lower than early projections -- and they certainly are going to be much, much lower -- then you've lost the narrative.
Click to expand...

Maybe for people who don't understand projections and what assumptions go into them. You make up this one-short nonsense as you go along? Original predictions were 2.2 million would die across the US. That's why policy changed across States to push that number way down. Every State ran their own projections and almost all came away with horrific numbers. That's why policy changed in pretty much EVERY country in the world, even those that resisted at first. Expecting projections to stay the same is idiotic. Projections always change as policy and new data comes in.
 
Last edited:
that is great news (except to the people who died and their family/friends).

now, over the next decades, we get to see what long term damage it did to the living.



cue the Y2k idiots now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom