The coronavirus

cincybearcat

mace1229 said:

josevolution said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

Reopening states will cause 233,000 more people to die from coronavirus, according to Wharton model

According to the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM), reopening states will result in an additional 233,000 deaths from the virus — even if states don’t reopen at all and with social distancing rules in place. This means that if the states were to reopen, 350,000 people in total would die from coronavirus by the end of June, the study found.



https://finance.yahoo.com/news/reopening-states-will-cause-233000-more-people-to-die-from-coronavirus-according-to-wharton-model-120049573.html

That doesn’t make sense to me. 233,000 more will die if we reopen,  or even if we don’t reopen and keep social distancing 233,000 will still die.
So 233,000 either way? Doesn’t sound like it’s the result of reopening then. They are contradicting their title by saying the same number will die if we reopen or not.

Read the whole article.

I did. It’s poorly written at best, to me looks like click bait to contradict your title within the first 2 paragraphs. 

That is the only mention of total deaths, it talks about a couple of states and also mentions a partial reopen will kill 46,000, a smaller number than if we stayed closed. So still doesn’t make sense.

Heck what’s a few thousand difference 100 k or 75 k or 200k they are just numbers at this point ,America’s ready for the final tally what ever that number might be after all we are #1 no?

Who said that? I was just pointing out the title of the article said 233,000 more will die if we reopen, but then reading the article it says 233,000 will die if we stay closed and keep social distancing, so either way apparently. Does that title not seem misleading to you? All I was saying, not sure where you came up with  what’s a few thousand more and all just numbers.
Apparently we can’t scrutinize the media for misleading articles anymore without being accusing of not caring if tens of thousands die.

Yes it was a very confusing sentence.  I read it a bunch to try and understand what it meant...and I was still guessing.

cincybearcat

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

Reopening states will cause 233,000 more people to die from coronavirus, according to Wharton model

According to the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM), reopening states will result in an additional 233,000 deaths from the virus — even if states don’t reopen at all and with social distancing rules in place. This means that if the states were to reopen, 350,000 people in total would die from coronavirus by the end of June, the study found.



https://finance.yahoo.com/news/reopening-states-will-cause-233000-more-people-to-die-from-coronavirus-according-to-wharton-model-120049573.html

That doesn’t make sense to me. 233,000 more will die if we reopen,  or even if we don’t reopen and keep social distancing 233,000 will still die.
So 233,000 either way? Doesn’t sound like it’s the result of reopening then. They are contradicting their title by saying the same number will die if we reopen or not.

Read the whole article.

I did. It’s poorly written at best, to me looks like click bait to contradict your title within the first 2 paragraphs. 

That is the only mention of total deaths, it talks about a couple of states and also mentions a partial reopen will kill 46,000, a smaller number than if we stayed closed. So still doesn’t make sense.

Is it the math or the reading you're having trouble with? Both are hard.

Really?  Did you read that sentence?  It was really poorly written.  Unsure why that would lead to such a nasty post.

josevolution

https://abcnews.go.com/US/colorado-man-planning-armed-protest-states-coronavirus-restrictions/story?id=70491370
It’s just a matter of time before this gets out of hand and a lot of people get killed by one of these idiots and why are no politicians coming out against this crap no mater what side your on!

dignin

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

Reopening states will cause 233,000 more people to die from coronavirus, according to Wharton model

According to the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM), reopening states will result in an additional 233,000 deaths from the virus — even if states don’t reopen at all and with social distancing rules in place. This means that if the states were to reopen, 350,000 people in total would die from coronavirus by the end of June, the study found.



https://finance.yahoo.com/news/reopening-states-will-cause-233000-more-people-to-die-from-coronavirus-according-to-wharton-model-120049573.html

That doesn’t make sense to me. 233,000 more will die if we reopen,  or even if we don’t reopen and keep social distancing 233,000 will still die.
So 233,000 either way? Doesn’t sound like it’s the result of reopening then. They are contradicting their title by saying the same number will die if we reopen or not.

Read the whole article.

I did. It’s poorly written at best, to me looks like click bait to contradict your title within the first 2 paragraphs. 

That is the only mention of total deaths, it talks about a couple of states and also mentions a partial reopen will kill 46,000, a smaller number than if we stayed closed. So still doesn’t make sense.

Is it the math or the reading you're having trouble with? Both are hard.

If I’m wrong it’s probably the reading. I got a 790 on the math SAT and about a 500 on the reading (back when it was a total of 1600).
But instead of being insulting you could try a conversation. You still haven’t said how it makes sense to say 233,000 die if we reopen, or 2330,000 still die if we don’t. Literally what the article said and you even quoted it. 

I will quote you quoting the article now:
 “reopening states will result in an additional 233,000 deaths from the virus — even if states don’t reopen at all and with social distancing rules in place.”

So is that not saying 233k die if we open, and 233k die even if we don’t?
Looking forward to an actual response. But if you can’t defend the article you posted, feel free to continue with random insults. That just lets us know you have nothing relevant to say.

Relax, it was just a joke. I'm sorry you felt insulted, it wasn't intended that way, more just a gentle ribbing. 

Maybe this is easier to digest.

https://www.cathlabdigest.com/content/penn-wharton-budget-model-covid-19-mortality-estimates-based-varying-levels-reopening-states-nationwide

• If states do not reopen before June 30, cumulative national deaths due to coronavirus would rise to around 117,000 by June 30 (including deaths prior to May 1). GDP on June 30, 2020 would be 11.6 percent lower than GDP one year earlier (“Year-Over-Year” or “YOY”). About 18.6 million jobs would be lost between May 1 and June 30.
   
• Partially reopening would cause 45,000 additional deaths by June 30, relative to not reopening. GDP on June 30 would increase by 1 percent, from an 11.6 percent YOY loss without reopening to a 10.7 YOY loss with partial reopening. About 4.4 million jobs would be saved, for a total of 14.0 million jobs lost between May 1 and June 30.
   
• Fully reopening would lead to an additional 233,000 deaths by the end of June relative to not reopening. GDP on June 30 would increase by about 1.5 percentage points relative to not reopening. Almost all net job losses between May 1 and June 30 would be eliminated.
   
• If, however, individuals see full reopening as a “return to normal” and as a result relax their own voluntary social distancing practices—behaving in a manner consistent with Feb 1, 2020—cumulative national deaths would reach 950,000 by June 30. Job losses would turn to a net positive of 4.1 million in jobs gained, erasing some of the job losses prior to May 1.

Here is the source.

https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2020/5/1/coronavirus-reopening-simulator

nicknyr15

cincybearcat said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

Reopening states will cause 233,000 more people to die from coronavirus, according to Wharton model

According to the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM), reopening states will result in an additional 233,000 deaths from the virus — even if states don’t reopen at all and with social distancing rules in place. This means that if the states were to reopen, 350,000 people in total would die from coronavirus by the end of June, the study found.



https://finance.yahoo.com/news/reopening-states-will-cause-233000-more-people-to-die-from-coronavirus-according-to-wharton-model-120049573.html

That doesn’t make sense to me. 233,000 more will die if we reopen,  or even if we don’t reopen and keep social distancing 233,000 will still die.
So 233,000 either way? Doesn’t sound like it’s the result of reopening then. They are contradicting their title by saying the same number will die if we reopen or not.

Read the whole article.

I did. It’s poorly written at best, to me looks like click bait to contradict your title within the first 2 paragraphs. 

That is the only mention of total deaths, it talks about a couple of states and also mentions a partial reopen will kill 46,000, a smaller number than if we stayed closed. So still doesn’t make sense.

Is it the math or the reading you're having trouble with? Both are hard.

Really?  Did you read that sentence?  It was really poorly written.  Unsure why that would lead to such a nasty post.

Unsure? Cmon dude. Its AMT. that’s how it works here. 

pjhawks

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

Reopening states will cause 233,000 more people to die from coronavirus, according to Wharton model

According to the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM), reopening states will result in an additional 233,000 deaths from the virus — even if states don’t reopen at all and with social distancing rules in place. This means that if the states were to reopen, 350,000 people in total would die from coronavirus by the end of June, the study found.



https://finance.yahoo.com/news/reopening-states-will-cause-233000-more-people-to-die-from-coronavirus-according-to-wharton-model-120049573.html

That doesn’t make sense to me. 233,000 more will die if we reopen,  or even if we don’t reopen and keep social distancing 233,000 will still die.
So 233,000 either way? Doesn’t sound like it’s the result of reopening then. They are contradicting their title by saying the same number will die if we reopen or not.

Read the whole article.

I did. It’s poorly written at best, to me looks like click bait to contradict your title within the first 2 paragraphs. 

That is the only mention of total deaths, it talks about a couple of states and also mentions a partial reopen will kill 46,000, a smaller number than if we stayed closed. So still doesn’t make sense.

Is it the math or the reading you're having trouble with? Both are hard.

If I’m wrong it’s probably the reading. I got a 790 on the math SAT and about a 500 on the reading (back when it was a total of 1600).
But instead of being insulting you could try a conversation. You still haven’t said how it makes sense to say 233,000 die if we reopen, or 2330,000 still die if we don’t. Literally what the article said and you even quoted it. 

I will quote you quoting the article now:
 “reopening states will result in an additional 233,000 deaths from the virus — even if states don’t reopen at all and with social distancing rules in place.”

So is that not saying 233k die if we open, and 233k die even if we don’t?
Looking forward to an actual response. But if you can’t defend the article you posted, feel free to continue with random insults. That just lets us know you have nothing relevant to say.

Relax, it was just a joke. I'm sorry you felt insulted, it wasn't intended that way, more just a gentle ribbing. 

Maybe this is easier to digest.

https://www.cathlabdigest.com/content/penn-wharton-budget-model-covid-19-mortality-estimates-based-varying-levels-reopening-states-nationwide

• If states do not reopen before June 30, cumulative national deaths due to coronavirus would rise to around 117,000 by June 30 (including deaths prior to May 1). GDP on June 30, 2020 would be 11.6 percent lower than GDP one year earlier (“Year-Over-Year” or “YOY”). About 18.6 million jobs would be lost between May 1 and June 30.
   
• Partially reopening would cause 45,000 additional deaths by June 30, relative to not reopening. GDP on June 30 would increase by 1 percent, from an 11.6 percent YOY loss without reopening to a 10.7 YOY loss with partial reopening. About 4.4 million jobs would be saved, for a total of 14.0 million jobs lost between May 1 and June 30.
   
• Fully reopening would lead to an additional 233,000 deaths by the end of June relative to not reopening. GDP on June 30 would increase by about 1.5 percentage points relative to not reopening. Almost all net job losses between May 1 and June 30 would be eliminated.
   
• If, however, individuals see full reopening as a “return to normal” and as a result relax their own voluntary social distancing practices—behaving in a manner consistent with Feb 1, 2020—cumulative national deaths would reach 950,000 by June 30. Job losses would turn to a net positive of 4.1 million in jobs gained, erasing some of the job losses prior to May 1.

Here is the source.

https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2020/5/1/coronavirus-reopening-simulator

good information.  I don't see people 'returning to normal in a manner consistent with feb 1 2020' for a long time.  Even if we fully re-open I don't see anything approaching normal of Feb 1 2020 any time soon.  People will still be wary to fly, go to restaurants, even go to work in an office for awhile.  I think a lot of people will dip those toes in but not fully jump.  If we can open but with restrictions (masks, limiting numbers in stores, etc.) that to me is the way to go.  the re-opening to a normal level will need to happen but will need to be at a slower pace then the closing down was.  

  

cincybearcat

nicknyr15 said:

cincybearcat said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

dignin said:

Reopening states will cause 233,000 more people to die from coronavirus, according to Wharton model

According to the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM), reopening states will result in an additional 233,000 deaths from the virus — even if states don’t reopen at all and with social distancing rules in place. This means that if the states were to reopen, 350,000 people in total would die from coronavirus by the end of June, the study found.



https://finance.yahoo.com/news/reopening-states-will-cause-233000-more-people-to-die-from-coronavirus-according-to-wharton-model-120049573.html

That doesn’t make sense to me. 233,000 more will die if we reopen,  or even if we don’t reopen and keep social distancing 233,000 will still die.
So 233,000 either way? Doesn’t sound like it’s the result of reopening then. They are contradicting their title by saying the same number will die if we reopen or not.

Read the whole article.

I did. It’s poorly written at best, to me looks like click bait to contradict your title within the first 2 paragraphs. 

That is the only mention of total deaths, it talks about a couple of states and also mentions a partial reopen will kill 46,000, a smaller number than if we stayed closed. So still doesn’t make sense.

Is it the math or the reading you're having trouble with? Both are hard.

Really?  Did you read that sentence?  It was really poorly written.  Unsure why that would lead to such a nasty post.

Unsure? Cmon dude. Its AMT. that’s how it works here. 

Hahahaha Fair enough!

oftenreading

I just saw a headline on a paywalled article that says Carnival cruise lines will resume some sailings in August. 

That’s a big “nope” for me. 

dignin

Careful, more clickbait.

The Trump administration is privately predicting the daily coronavirus death toll will almost double over the next month, with new infections increasing from 25,000 per day to 200,000

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-administration-predicts-daily-virus-deaths-will-double-by-june-2020-5

CDC privately projects significant May surge in coronavirus cases and deaths

https://www.axios.com/cdc-projections-coronavirus-may-june-a96726e7-acc8-4855-b603-dc6518f560f5.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100

cutz

cincybearcat said:

Meltdown99 said:

No guarantee coronavirus vaccine will be found soon, infectious disease expert tells Q+A

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/apr/21/no-guarantee-coronavirus-vaccine-will-be-found-soon-infectious-disease-expert-tells-qa

Should You Get an Antibody Test?

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/611005/

I'm unsure why all these "no vaccine" articles and interviews starting popping up.  There has been nothing but good news on that front.  Certainly still a risk, but we've had reports of multiple vaccines in human study that we successful in other tests.

Oxford professor: Possible coronavirus vaccine could show efficacy by June

https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/495865-oxford-professor-possible-coronavirus-vaccine-could-show-efficacy

pjl44

oftenreading said:

I just saw a headline on a paywalled article that says Carnival cruise lines will resume some sailings in August. 

That’s a big “nope” for me. 

If I can't go see a club show, those giant germ factories can stay docked for the foreseeable future

tempo_n_groove

oftenreading said:

I just saw a headline on a paywalled article that says Carnival cruise lines will resume some sailings in August. 

That’s a big “nope” for me. 

Spiritual_Chaos

During the Public Health Authority's daily press conference on the corona virus, Karin Tegmark Wisell, head of the department of microbiology, announced that an infection in covid-19 provides an immunity protection. An expert group has come to the conclusion after reviewing the overall state of knowledge.

- A proven immune response is considered to provide full or partial protection against clinical disease in the event of a re-infection.

Renfield

oftenreading said:

I just saw a headline on a paywalled article that says Carnival cruise lines will resume some sailings in August. 

That’s a big “nope” for me. 

Seems so wrong
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/05/04/business/ap-us-carnival-cruise-reopening.html

Renfield

For those of us in NY State. See ya sometime in mid June? (I’m in NYC and Phase 2.)

mfc2006

Renfield said:

oftenreading said:

I just saw a headline on a paywalled article that says Carnival cruise lines will resume some sailings in August. 

That’s a big “nope” for me. 

Seems so wrong
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/05/04/business/ap-us-carnival-cruise-reopening.html

Idiots. 

OnWis97

I can't imagine anyone taking a cruise any time in the near future...like before there's not only a vaccine but a significant amount of "normal" time has passed.

I'll never take one (never really wanted to, anyway, but even if I did, there's no way I'd be doing it in 2020).

gimmesometruth27

missouri started to open up today. funny because just yesterday we had the highest number of new cases since the pandemic began.

god help us.

Renfield

gimmesometruth27 said:

missouri started to open up today. funny because just yesterday we had the highest number of new cases since the pandemic began.

god help us.

And you can go to concerts!!

https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/9368428/missouri-concerts-resume-may-4-coronavirus

 “event organizers are expected to keep concertgoers six feet or more apart to limit the spread of the novel coronavirus.”  How does that work?

mfc2006

gimmesometruth27 said:

missouri started to open up today. funny because just yesterday we had the highest number of new cases since the pandemic began.

god help us.

I know it....it's fucking nuts. I'm staying home. F that.