Non-IT News Thread
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
Exactly - there are so many more people who have it than they realize.
Example, for the day that just ended....
30,000 new tested infections and 2,341 deaths. That's a single day, the on upward slope of the pandemic in this locality!
And that's how bad it is with all reasonable states in the most extreme lockdown in history. No flu has ever had this level of medical or political care taken to restrict it. None, ever.
I think we are worlds past "bad as the flu." We are solidly into "holy effing shit, this is so much worse than any flu" category already.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
In the last decade, the most deadly estimate for any annual flu for the US was 61K deaths. That's the highest, and it's for a year.
But that is with an available and used vaccination in the market...
According to this page from the CDC, over 65% of those who are aged 60+ have been getting the flu vaccination for longer than the last decade. I seen some articles that said it was higher! And also, roughly half of all adults!
So I think that has a significant impact on reducing the number of deaths due to the flu in the U.S., making it seem like it's a whole lot less of a deal than it actually is.
Here's a page from the CDC that's more recent, but with less info.
I'm not saying COVID-19 is less deadly than the flu, what I'm saying is that the flu is worse than you just portrayed, without the high yearly vaccination rate for well over this last decade, especially the elderly.
-
-
@Grey said in Non-IT News Thread:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616
Cool chart, what point of mine is it meant to address?
-
@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Grey said in Non-IT News Thread:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616
Cool chart, what point of mine is it meant to address?
Just supporting your post.
-
@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:
According to this page from the CDC, over 65% of those who are aged 60+ have been getting the flu vaccination for longer than the last decade. I seen some articles that said it was higher! And also, roughly half of all adults!
So I think that has a significant impact on reducing the number of deaths due to the flu in the U.S., making it seem like it's a whole lot less of a deal than it actually is.Good point. I know of almost no one that gets it and truly forget it even exists until I stop to think about it. I've almost never known someone to have the flu even as a child when vaccines didn't exist, probably rural NY just wasn't likely to spread it. It's weird, because as an adult we talk about the flu like it is a real risk. But before we had vaccines, it was essentially unheard of. So much so, they called other things the flu (norovirus) and even knowing that the flu was a real thing is recent. As recent as 2013 I had a doctor that used the term for things that weren't actually flu and his nurse had to explain that he didn't know what the flu actually was after he left the room.
-
@Grey said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Obsolesce https://www.abc.net.au/cm/lb/12090836/data/fallback-image-data.png
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616
Needs Spain. And normalized for population.
-
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
Business first.
-
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
It was on the ML Telegram group chat.
-
@black3dynamite said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
Business first.
Well it means those employees were getting RAISES to be unemployed AND are angry to have free money taken away for being lazy. They should just be fired.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@black3dynamite said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
Business first.
Well it means those employees were getting RAISES to be unemployed AND are angry to have free money taken away for being lazy. They should just be fired.
Thanks for explaining that.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
You can't really expect people to not do what's in their own best interest. It was ridiculous to pay so much, or not make tiers... yeah yeah, excuses to get things done faster.. whatever, this is really damning to the smaller businesses out there that pay those low wages.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
You can't really expect people to not do what's in their own best interest.
Doing, and being mad that they don't get free money during a pandemic aren't the same thing. That they took advantage of the money being handed out, that's fine. That they are angry that they don't keep getting more if it when they could be working, not okay.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
whatever, this is really damning to the smaller businesses out there that pay those low wages.
No, it's not. Irrational people looking for scapegoats for their own problems blaming those that are not at fault is the issue.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
whatever, this is really damning to the smaller businesses out there that pay those low wages.
No, it's not. Irrational people looking for scapegoats for their own problems blaming those that are not at fault is the issue.
Super sad that this is our president right now.
-
NY has done sampling across the state and now shows a 14% infection rate among the living, which shows that the believed number of current survivors is at 2.71 million in one state alone (larger than the full global infection rate being reported by the WHO) and the state has said that the number dead from COVID are unknown as they haven't even started to try to count them yet! So the total number that are currently recorded is essentially just the currently infected and the recovered, the total number ever infected will need the dead count added in, once they know it. Putting NY quite a bit head of the supposed world numbers.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
NY has done sampling across the state and now shows a 14% infection rate among the living,
I saw the fine print of that. They sampled 1024 (it was 10XX, 24 stuck in my head) people. That means the margin of error is +/- 3% for a population the size of NY state. Assuming at 95% confidence level in the data.
But they used anti-body test kits for this which we also know are not fully accurate.
I did not see how much of NY was sampled, nor in what proportion (city vs rural) Because that will also make a large difference in the confidence level of the data..
