Posted on 10/31/2020 5:35:41 PM PDT by blam
sorry. wasn’t referring to your comment at all, but at some earlier comments re IFR.
Links and sources, please. I stand by what I wrote. It's downtown SF that is a ghost town, but it will revive after Covid-19 shutdowns end. Everywhere else in SF, is still populated and business is happening. I was in downtown SF a few days ago, on the west side of Van Ness which cuts through the middle, and it was crowded and busy, no parking to be found. Homes that are for sale, still sell quickly within a week or two. I'm in South SF, two homes went on the market in my neighborhood and have sales pending within a week. Same goes for what a couple of my relatives living in SF tell me. People may be leaving, but others are still coming. And a lot of Chinese are still coming in. I see mostly Asians at open houses for sale. Just because a lot of techies are telecommuting from home and not going into downtown to work does not mean they have moved away. One of my daughters and her husband have been telecommuting daily rather than go into work in SF to their techie jobs. Once the Covid-19 restrictions end, they'll be back at the job sites.
In addition to things like Nerdrotic’s podcasts, where people are reporting this, there’s my relatives in SF.
They’re ethnically Chinese.
They’re telling me that they and most of their communities are leaving.
Mind, most of them are going up to the Seattle/Vancouver area, so not the smartest idea, but they’re leaving.
So all that’s left is the homeless.
That’s going to work out really well.
I've been to Seattle and Vancouver. Yes, not the smartest idea! Except there are a lot of Chinese restaurants in Seattle and Vancouver. But the weather is not so good. My wife is Chinese, so we frequent a lot of Chinese restaurants. Although she prefers Mexican food, go figure.
The cancer spreads, these people leaving bring with them the liberal progressive disease
2.5% CFR. Please don't conflate CFR and IFR. See my previous post for the IFR for NYC. The IFR for Indiana is 0.26%. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-5352?utm_source=24-scientists-determine-death-rate-covid-19-general-population&utm_medium=email&utm_content=published+in+the+Annals+of+Internal+Medicine&utm_campaign=ag The study excluded assisted living and nursing homes which would have doubled that (0.6 according to a comment).
You can make up any BS you like, but that won’t change the facts.
You are conflating IFR and CFR. Or just ignoring IFR which is 0.1% for the worst typs of flu.
Doesn't matter whether you believe it or not. There are excess deaths on the other of 200,000+ and whether those are COVID or other causes those are more than expected. But don't listen to calenel either. He/she conflates IFR and CFR. The CFR is high only because we don't test everyone or large random populations for antibodies.
But when we do that, see my previous post. We find an IFR about 0.25% to 1% That's 2.5 to 10 times worse than flu. Not good but not the end of the world. Also calenel won't tell you that the higher number (1%) was from NYC where they basically killed everyone through bad policy and broken hospitals. IFR is much lower now, closer to 0.25% in the rest of the country.
Bottom line from the IFR and from the excess deaths (currently about 800 / day), the China virus is more than twice as bad as flu, and it lasts all year. The flu kills 1000 / day during the peak. China virus killed 2300 / day during the peak. It's not correct to soft peddle it as fake death. Nor is it correct to peddle 2.5% death.
CFR only includes resolved cases. That from multiple sources including actual doctors. So the CFR is 3.9%. IFR includes active cases, so it is 2.5%.
I’m not the one conflating CFR and IFR. That’s you.
IFR for the flu, a point on which we agree, is 0.1%. It is a historical measure used with historical data and in that calculation the cases have virtually all resolved. But this isn’t the flu, anyway. Pretending it is has already killed a lot of people.
You keep posting about NYC, but that isn’t even the city the article is about. You are deliberately inserting junk claims into the discussion in order to muddy the waters so your bogus claims might pass without scrutiny. That’s a dirty liberal trick.
Your article also does not say what you seem to think it says, and you neglected to include in your claims all the caveats the authors used for their study.
For NYC, it’s simple - Cuomo moved the deaths out of the city by exporting the sick. He also encouraged (inadvertently) exodus NY, which affected the whole eastern seaboard. That makes NYC unsuitable for any objective study. And, again, this isn’t just about NYC, and per the OP’s article, not about NYC at all.
IFR includes postiive antibodies and was 0.26% in Indiana. Read the paper I linked. Read the comments afterwards that claim that 0.26 is too low. Some of that is legit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.