Johnnycage46

Really, "no one with any understanding of stats or how viruses work agree"? And where did you glean this pearl of wisdom. The death rate at this time, with available data, is about 6%. Regardless of how that makes you feel about this upcoming election; the facts, as they stand now, are the facts.

Hi, "he" here. Confirmed cases is a real number. Its what we have to work with. That is how data works. In any data set, we can always wonder about unknowns, but end of day we work with what we have. What do you consider "real data"? Asking for a friend.

The current death rate in the US is based on confirmed cases and total deaths RIGHT NOW. I have stated this ad nauseam. I acknowledge that the death rate is likely to change either higher or lower with more data....but right now...with data available, it is what it is. My initial remarks were in regard to others' claims that other pandemics were deadlier...however, that too is inaccurate if we can't possibly know the death rate until after the virus subsides. And further, I call that all BS. We have cancer mortality rates based on current data...we don't wait until there is a cure for that type of cancer to decide what the "final" death rate is. Lol, just like you right Timmy? Immovable object meets the irresistible force.

Dude. I said. It. Is. Based. On. Confirmed. Cases. I didn't say who did or did not receive tests. The data is based on CONFIRMED cases regardless of what "shape they were in". And I already stated that the death rate is subject to change based on final data. There seems to be a certain leaning to the push back on this.

Actually it CAN. It's like saying you can't calculate your car's gas mileage right now and you have to wait until you sell your car for it to be official. The DEATH RATE OF COVID-19 RIGHT NOW IS ABOUT 6%. That is a fact based on available data. Like I said already, those data may change, but right now it is fact. I don't know if you do, but IF you do, please don't single-source your news. It will broaden your world.

It's not based on "only the people who had it the worst". Its based on CONFIRMED cases. At this time, those data are accurate. Those data will likely change as time goes on (either increasing or decreasing the overall death rate). But those are the data we have.

I am not making things up lol. It's ok for you to be wrong buddy. Death rate AT THIS TIME is about 6% compared to less than 1% for the other pandemics you cited. Not ranting. Just responding to people who can't accept facts. It's ok to be wrong. It's OK! God I hope so. I am just so scared.

Well aren't you a big boy. Walmart scares me for many reasons. But in general, selfish, ignorant, and misguided people scare me the most. Edit: sorry, forgot to wish you a great party this weekend. Might want to check the evil media reports of all the new clusters of Covid that keep appearing when morons refuse to follow not only state guidelines, but the President's guidelines. Enjoy!

Here ya go: https://www.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/ This is the US CDC for US cases and deaths. Sits at about 5.9% or, as I said about 6%. In my original post I quoted global data that I found through a simple Google search looking for "COVID-19 death rate". The 1% is not accurate. About 6 time too low. Also, your link is 2 weeks out of date, AND a predictive model...NOT actual rate based on actual collected data.

You, I guess??? You used data that by your own admission is an incomplete study....as did I. Then you refuted my take due to incomplete data. So you can't have it both ways. Nope. Also, he said we can't use death rate as we don't yet know the final tally but we CAN use any other parameters to make a point just so long as it is in line with his thinking.

So then we CAN use the incomplete data set to draw parallels? Then the death rate data I presented is still v as laid in this application.

So then it might be best to stop comparing other pandemics to this one until the dust settles. I mean, if we dont yet have all the data, comparisons are pointless.

Don't confuse freedom with selfishness. Freedom to do what you want is your right...but it isn't someone's right to live their free life while endangering others. Comparably...drunk driving....hey man....freedom!!!! And why would anyone trust the government? Most of which are self serving slime balls who will change their "beliefs" at the drop of a hat to stay in office and keep that sweet power.

The scariest part to me is how it seems like a lot of people are putting their own little selfish needs before the health of others. For example, my neighbor here in Henrietta (suburb of Rochester) has about 15 cars worth of people at her (presumed) Memorial Day party. I get that we all want to get back to normal, but the more people start to stray outside the lines, the more likely it would seem that we'll all have a longer lock-down, no live events (including the NFL), and continued quarantine misery. Sucks.

Both of those pandemics had a global death rate below 1%. Whereas COVID-19 currently has a global death rate of ~6%. Can't just look at the total number of deaths. The death rate is a more significant factor.

Yeah and they should never have added the forward pass damn it! I say keep the integrity of the game and leave the plays in the game alone!! God you must be bored.

I have to 100% disagree with you on this. So, do you think if a woman is groped and prodded and touched against her will she would be ok with it if it was some handsome dude. That is total BS.

Actual experts. No quotations. Just, actual experts, with expert expertise in the field of infectious disease...expert.

Man these are shorter every year. Still fun content, but wish they could be a little longer/in-depth.

It's really funny how wanting jobs to be based on ability and NOT skin color is considered racist now. That seems to be the exact opposite of racism. I know full well racism is alive and well in this country and around the world. But it's not automatically racism if a minority doesn't get a job as a head coach or GM in the NFL. In this league where winning is everything, it seems absolutely absurd to think an owner or GM would not want to hire a coach that they felt gave them the best chance to win, simply based on the fact that that candidate is a minority. All while that example/fictional team is likely upwards of a 70% non-white roster. It just doesn't compute.

Is the lack of diversity at the player level an equal problem? I would agree that it is. And how do we KNOW that coaching choices aren't a meritocracy?

You don't drink it!!!!! You inject it.

Right but the discussion was not about his place among the greats. The original comment that I replied to was in regard to not counting the Pats out of the division race this year because Belichik is "all world". So nobody is saying he doesn't have a legacy. That was never mentioned by me. I was merely stating that without Brady it hasn't been all roses for Bill and the Pats. So without Brady this year, and with very weak QB play, I don't think the "all world" status of Belichik will matter.

Done! They're out of there! I get it. Belichik is great. My only point is that there are a lot of variables to consider during the Pats dynasty especially the continuity between HC and QB. I'll give you the Browns 11-5 team. But that was a single season. It just seems that there can't be a coincidence between Belichik's record once Brady arrived and before Brady arrived.

While I won't argue against Belichik being a great coach, his "all world" status has only ever been with Brady. In his head coaching career with the Browns and with the Pats without Brady playing (2000 and 2008), his winning percentage is 46.4%. Not exactly all world. The next couple of seasons without Brady will really tell a lot about who was responsible for their dynasty. Maybe they both needed each other.