Magox

The argument that seems to be missing in this whole debate is the painting of the picture of what appears to be systemic abuse against the Trump campaign. 1) First the whole predicate of the investigation centered around the debunked Steele Dossier. Which was bought and paid for by the Hillary campaign. Which was then disseminated by Bruce Ohr and his wife who have clear biases. 2) Then there were phone taps that at very best were egregiously carried out and at worst criminally conducted to spy on the Trump administration. What was it? Like over 40 instances, right? 3) Then you have all these White house and intelligence officials who all said one thing publicly - claiming that there either was or could have been Russian Collusion and implicated Flynn and other Trump officials but all of them behind closed doors under testimony said the exact same opposite. 4) Now you have all these people in the White House that unmasked what is IN FACT a political opponent. Were they justified? I don't know, but it needs to be investigated. And I'm not sure how common this is, but the Chief of Staff of Obama, The VP Biden and other US ambassadors of countries like Italy were all involved with this? How unusual is this? And the fact that someone out of that group leaked it to the media which really started off this firestorm of events. The media likes to try to MediaHackSplain their way each particular instance. But when you put all of it together it clearly shows that there was a pattern of abuse. Sure, if it one of these facts stood out on their own, you could make an explanation. But two, three, four???? This is more than just smoke, there is definitely some fire here and it is up to the Durham and the US Senators to get to the bottom of this.

In other words. "FACTS BE DAMNED! I am a mouth-breathing partisan who will only believe what I want to believe. HARUMPHHHHH!!"

How convenient

What's funny, well it's not funny but I have "friends" on my FB. And many of them are solidly on the "Stay at home" crowd to the point of social shaming. So usually every couple days I post some news on my page. News that isn't the typical top line hysterical inducing stuff you get from the mainstream but more in depth sort of things. The sort of things that I think are important and that aren't shared enough. It's amazing to me how many people are not even willing to read anything that could be viewed as positive or the detriments of the shut down orders. They refuse to read it or even acknowledge it. I know this because I post it and they reply back within seconds meaning they don't care to read what's inside it. For the mainstream media they have conditioned their viewers to negativity surrounding the virus. They know that their viewers don't want to read or hear about these other effects because it goes against the confirmation bias that they have been fed for the better part of the past 10 weeks. In short - it's not good business. Which is why I have been saying for many years now but even more apparent now than ever before, the media is a broken institution.

Yeah, I am aware that there are accounts of it but when I say untold I mean that it is not a story where nearly enough light is being shed on.

I just want to lay out a scenario and weave a story for a second. But it's based off data. Imagine you have families and lets say parents who are alcoholics. Now let's say those parents are now stuck at home without a job. Let's say those parents have children who they have to homeschool. Let's say that these parents who are alcoholics are depressed at home without jobs, and we know that alcohol sales are surging. So now, you have a depressed parent, who is out of work, and in their view stuck all day with their kids, losing patience, having to homeschool which they have never done, drinking more alcohol. What could go wrong? I have no doubt that there is a huge untold story of child and spousal abuse that is going on.

85k in the grand scheme of things is not a reason to sacrifice what will arguably many more deleterious shut down related deaths. The targeted approach that I suggested would be much more wise. But it's ok to disagree, that's why we have this forum. In any case, this came out recently. UNICEF Chief of health today said:

Actually, we do know what it is capable of and there is a lot of data to help us understand that. Also, the idea that we are going to keep the "sick in quarantine" being the key is unrealistic. There are too many asymptomatics to do that and even if you could achieve that you would absolutely have to crush the economy for that to happen. Maybe it's somewhat possible to do that in less dense populated areas, but the idea that we are going to achieve that is not realistic. We don't need to be so afraid of this virus, for people under 65 it is as risky as the flu. There is tons of data to support that. The solution is clear. Protect the front line workers and most vulnerable with extreme vigor. Continue developing therapeutics. Practice common sense social distancing. Have enough testing for everyone who is showing symptoms and conduct targeted surveillance testing throughout the country. Our immune systems are built like a fortress and 99.7% of us are able to defeat this pathogen. That is the best defense and science and the data tells us that when you consider all the residual effects of the Shut downs and extreme social distancing that the best policy is to open up this economy and restore normalcy as much as you can while implementing the things that I suggested.

What does potentially mean?

On one hand the bad news is that’s it’s highly infectious on the other hand it’s not nearly as lethal as feared. On balance it’s more good than bad. As a society we need to recognize that a ***** virus came to us from China. And that luckily it’s not nearly as deadly as initially feared and that the deleterious effects of a shut down or extreme social distancing policies are very likely net worse than the virus itself. And that we should be guided by the data which tells us that people under 65 are as safe as if they were to get the flu and that we need to get back to as normalized of a society as possible while doing everything we can to protect the front line workers and those that are most vulnerable. Doesn’t look great but every single metric is better than it was one week ago. More testing, less positive tests, lower positive test rates and less deaths. The trend is going in the right direction

Data points. It's an aggregation of data but it does help validate my thoughts. If I really had to pin it down and narrow the range my gut tells me that the mortality rate is between .3%-.45% - Specially when you see the prison and pork plant examples, huge sample size of over 4000 positive tests with over 97% asymptomatics. For me that is very telling.

I think that number is going to be much higher than 80%. The pork plan in Missouri example. 370 people tested positive. Every single one were asymptomatic. Or the four prisons in the US where 3300 inmates tested positive and 96% were asymptomatic. Or The Tennessee prison where over 500 inmates and staff tested positive with 98% were asymptomatic. Albeit these are anecdotal accounts, this is a sizable sample. We are talking about over 4000 cases in 6 separate environments with an average asymptomatic rate of over 97%. That to me is pretty strong evidence.

Yet another Serological study, this one shows a much lower mortality rate...This one was conducted in Holland and shows .1% which is the same as the flu. And I hit jackpot. Check this out. There are 52 studies here all compiled in one link/spreadsheet. When they compiled the 52 findings - the average IFR mortality rate was only .28% I predicted that it would be somewhere between .25%-.5%. @shoshin I know you are interested in these things.

Except one of them leaked it to the press. Is that part of the process as well? Of course not, which means that there is criminality involved and we need to find out who was the leaker. And since someone did leak it as well as all the other information that is out there, there has to be an investigation and hearings to get to the bottom of this and find out exactly why they did this? What was their justifiable predicate for doing so? And why did one of them feel the need to leak it to the press? Keep in mind it was the leaks that brought on the pressure of this entire Russian collusion hoax.

Graham will do it...He has an election coming up and there is a strong desire from the Republican base to get their turn with the investigations.

I believe it was Grassley who released it. So if Grassley wants to do it then they will I assume, correct?

This is remarkable. Does this mean that there will be hearings?

?

Biden...Interesting.

Here we go

It's not conclusive, just that It's a data point. That's how I view all these studies, just an aggregation of data to better formulate my conclusions.

Another study on Mortality rates and other data. This study shows a higher mortality rate of .7%. It also backs up the assertion that people under age 20 are virtually at statistically speaking at nearly 0 chance of dying.

And that doesn't even take into account the shut down related deaths. Suicides, heart and cancer patients not getting care, etc. And I saw this in regards to nursing homes strategy. If they can continue to do this, it will help tremendously.

Who me?