I am not sure we would have lost the million or more being suggested today?
 |
| “We’re going to lose anywhere from 75 to 100,000 people. Without his administration’s actions, the minimum we would have lost was a million two, a million four, a million five, that’s the minimum.” |
While the actual projections for Covid-19 deaths goes up, the original projections for how many would have died goes down. When epidemiologist Neil Ferguson, who created the highly-cited Imperial College London coronavirus model, dropped his projections by about 95% we should have realized that the original totals were out to lunch.
No way, no how were we going to see two million people die from this particular virus short of actively trying to infect people, and even then, that might be pushing it. Let's provide the benefit of the doubt and assume that Governor Cuomo's own suggestion that the death rate in New York (based on their studies) is somewhere around 0.5% are somewhat accurate and could be used nationally. Technically they are probably higher than most of America, but let's use them anyways.
In order for 2,000,000 Americans to have died, 400,000,000 would have needed to be infected. That means that every single American would have need to be infected once, and then about 20% of Americans would have needed to come back for round two.
Considering that the death rate is much lower (possibly only a fraction of the Seasonal flu numbers) for the young and healthy, there is quite literally no way we would have ever seen a million, much less two million deaths. Not unless pretty much ever statistical metric and empirical data point is completely inaccurate.
The President and all of his bluster is somehow suggesting that the Administration, Task Force, and State led initiatives helped to save lives. I am quite certain that is true (at least in the short run). To the degree that it helped is impossible to know for sure. Most empirical data suggests that those who took very extreme measures got only marginally better results than places that did very little. If even that. It certainly didn't save a million lives, much less two million.
I would offer that we might have cut down the amount of actual death by a percentage that is far less than is being suggested. Perhaps only by thirty percent, or twenty percent, or even as little as ten percent. I know that I am in the minority here. But I simply have a hard time believing "new" models coming out that are showing us how many lives were saved because of lock downs or what will happen if we end the lock down. The problem is that they appear to use the same fundamental guidance as previous models that turned out to be flat out wrong.
Why should we believe them now?
No way, no how were we going to see two million people die from this particular virus short of actively trying to infect people, and even then, that might be pushing it. Let's provide the benefit of the doubt and assume that Governor Cuomo's own suggestion that the death rate in New York (based on their studies) is somewhere around 0.5% are somewhat accurate and could be used nationally. Technically they are probably higher than most of America, but let's use them anyways.
In order for 2,000,000 Americans to have died, 400,000,000 would have needed to be infected. That means that every single American would have need to be infected once, and then about 20% of Americans would have needed to come back for round two.
Considering that the death rate is much lower (possibly only a fraction of the Seasonal flu numbers) for the young and healthy, there is quite literally no way we would have ever seen a million, much less two million deaths. Not unless pretty much ever statistical metric and empirical data point is completely inaccurate.
The President and all of his bluster is somehow suggesting that the Administration, Task Force, and State led initiatives helped to save lives. I am quite certain that is true (at least in the short run). To the degree that it helped is impossible to know for sure. Most empirical data suggests that those who took very extreme measures got only marginally better results than places that did very little. If even that. It certainly didn't save a million lives, much less two million.
I would offer that we might have cut down the amount of actual death by a percentage that is far less than is being suggested. Perhaps only by thirty percent, or twenty percent, or even as little as ten percent. I know that I am in the minority here. But I simply have a hard time believing "new" models coming out that are showing us how many lives were saved because of lock downs or what will happen if we end the lock down. The problem is that they appear to use the same fundamental guidance as previous models that turned out to be flat out wrong.
Why should we believe them now?
6 comments:
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. officials believe China covered up the extent of the coronavirus outbreak — and how contagious the disease is — to stock up on medical supplies needed to respond to it, intelligence documents show.
Chinese leaders “intentionally concealed the severity” of the pandemic from the world in early January, according to a four-page Department of Homeland Security intelligence report dated May 1 and obtained by The Associated Press. The revelation comes as the Trump administration has intensified its criticism of China, with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo saying Sunday that that country was responsible for the spread of disease and must be held accountable.
https://apnews.com/bf685dcf52125be54e030834ab7062a8
In other words, China let the world burn for almost a month to try to save themselves. That’s the country the WHO and many American media companies have chosen to side with routinely. That’s the country some like Bill Gates are claiming did a good job early on with the virus. All so they can snipe at the orange man.
https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2020/05/04/new-report-shows-chinas-lying-about-wuhan-virus-was-far-worse-than-originally-though/
h/t: AoS
China Created this Virus and unleashed it upon the world.
They are now calling it panic porn or my favorite, pandemic porn.
The CIA Inspector General has taken more than a year to clear the release of a House Intelligence Committee report which contradicts the key conclusion of the intelligence community assessment on Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to the former chief of staff of the National Security Council.
The January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), prepared at the behest of President Barack Obama, claimed that Russia interfered in the presidential election in order to help candidate Donald Trump. The House Intelligence Committee's public report (pdf) on Russia had already challenged the analytic tradecraft behind this central claim and suggested that the process of arriving at the assessment was not free of political interference.
A separate, classified report holed up at the office of the CIA Inspector General (IG) sheds damning light on the role then-CIA Director John Brennan played in the preparation of the report, former National Security Council Chief of Staff Fred Fleitz learned from House Intelligence Committee staff. A source familiar with the report's fate would not deny that the report went to the office of the CIA IG.
The report states that Brennan overruled agency analysts who wanted to include strong intelligence in the assessment to show that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted Hillary Clinton to win the election, Fleitz says, citing conversations with House Intelligence Committee staffers. Brennan had also rejected analysts who wanted to strike weak intelligence from the report which suggested that Russia favored Trump, Fleitz said.
"So Brennan actually slanted this analysis, choosing anti-Trump intelligence and excluding anti-Clinton intelligence," Fleitz told The Epoch Times.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/cia-watchdog-sitting-on-secret-house-report-allegedly-critical-of-brennans-role-in-russian-meddling-assessment_3337863.html
brennan needs to be arrested, tried, convicted and hung from the neck until dead.
Brennan, Strzok, Weissman, Comey. What a bunch of arrogant pricks.
Top Cop Crininals.
Post a Comment