Lockdowns don't work.

Kassiopeija

Kassiopeija

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
That growth looks exactly like the sort of growth in places with lockdowns. NYC is seeing 1000+ new cases per day and it has one of the strictest lokdowns in the world. The lock down there started March 12, like this graph.
Click to expand...
I find it problematic to compare graphs of a land to that of a city. esp. Sweden that is has very little capita per skm... its not an ideal place for pathogens to spread that swiftly... so thats one of the reasons why Sweden can try out this strategy in the first place.

Our minister of interior affairs said in a state-broadcast interview that the reduction of counter measures has to occur in conjunction with a flattening of curve, and thats exactly what Im seeing in my case here. Theres alot of factors that may weigh in on those numbers, so you really cant jump to conclusions on isolated topics.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Kassiopeija said:
I find it problematic to compare graphs of a land to that of a city. esp. Sweden that is has very little capita per skm... its not an ideal place for pathogens to spread that swiftly... so thats one of the reasons why Sweden can try out this strategy in the first place.

Our minister of interior affairs said in a state-broadcast interview that the reduction of counter measures has to occur in conjunction with a flattening of curve, and thats exactly what Im seeing in my case here. Theres alot of factors that may weigh in on those numbers, so you really cant jump to conclusions on isolated topics.
Click to expand...
Cool. I agree different places are different. However, it has been more than a month since NYC implemented one of the strictest lockdowns in the world. There have been more than 6300 new confirmed cases there in the last 24 hours. Can you explain how people are still getting sick now that fomites are illegal?
 
Kassiopeija

Kassiopeija

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
However, it has been more than a month since NYC implemented one of the strictest lockdowns in the world. There have been more than 6300 new confirmed cases there in the last 24 hours. Can you explain how people are still getting sick
Click to expand...
Screenshot_20200414-144923~2.png
well the exponential growth at the beginning got throttled down to linear growth in a matter of a week - and thats somewhat in line with the incubation period.
Then the number of daily new cases stalled but I think its too early to say if its already in decline...
but Im not an expert in this field...there are many variables which can influence & distort the numbers
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Cool. I agree different places are different. However, it has been more than a month since NYC implemented one of the strictest lockdowns in the world. There have been more than 6300 new confirmed cases there in the last 24 hours. Can you explain how people are still getting sick now that fomites are illegal?
Click to expand...
Wrong question. The correct question is what would have happened if social distancing measures were not implemented. So far the predictive power of the mathematical models suggest they are accurate.
 
Kassiopeija

Kassiopeija

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
what would have happened if social distancing measures were not implemented.
Click to expand...
then the graphs would rise exponentionally, when a few weeks ago we had that situation I projected that rate into the future. There was a doubling of deaths n new cases every 5 days, resulting in 200-500 mio mortalities in 1-2 years, just from the first wave.
You can see this develop in each of the curves in the very beginning but it did shrink and can get overlooked.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
Wrong question. The correct question is what would have happened if social distancing measures were not implemented. So far the predictive power of the mathematical models suggest they are accurate.
Click to expand...
No they aren't. That graph is showing new cases per day, not total number of cases. It's logarithmic, not linear. They make the line look different that way. Besides that, I am not arguing against social distancing. I'm arguing against the strictest lockdowns in the world which flatten the economy. 6337 new cases in a fucking day. That's more than 3% of the total in less than 3% of the days since one of the strictest lockdowns in the world started. That is astronomical growth in case numbers with a pretty skirt on it to fool you into thinking that a lockdown is slowing the spread.

That's ridiculous.
 
Johnny Lawrence

Johnny Lawrence

Well-Known Member
And yeah, it's easy for me to shelter in place. I'm financially secure, own multiple homes, have plenty of money saved.

A lot of people in my industry are not so lucky. I already have friends who have left San Diego because they can't pay rent. Bartenders, servers, stage hands, sound and lighting guys - many of them live paycheck to paycheck. I've already had to reach into my own pocket to help some of my friends out. Another friend owns two bars. He's on the verge of having to close one of them down. This is a legendary(but small) music venue that employs a dozen or so people.

My parents estimate they've lost a couple million dollars as a result of this shut down.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
No they aren't. That graph is showing new cases per day, not total number of cases. It's logarithmic, not linear. They make the line look different that way. Besides that, I am not arguing against social distancing. I'm arguing against the strictest lockdowns in the world which flatten the economy. 6337 new cases in a fucking day. That's more than 3% of the total in less than 3% of the days since one of the strictest lockdowns in the world started. That is astronomical growth in case numbers with a pretty skirt on it to fool you into thinking that a lockdown is slowing the spread.

That's ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Provide a theoretical model for you assumptions at least, since you are arguing against established predictive models that have thus far proven to be accurate and that are based on solid theory. A logarithmic scale best represents the data and makes trend lines easier to spot, that's it's purpose.

The main problem lies in the thread title, lock down is too loose a term to ask meaningful questions and is a declarative not a scientific question. There is simply too much nuance in the term, we must define these things more clearly and precisely Abandon inorder to ask meaningful questions. We must break the problem down into its component parts, each country and culture must be taken into account along with the measures taken and their adherence or even practicality.
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
There is also the jackass element that since this is in the political section that must be weighed into this.

There are fucknuts out there licking deodorant if we are not thinking/aware of the danger of combining that kind of shit with the fully propagandized racists/crazies that are running over little kids of color and shooting up schools, running through crowds in a car.

Just 'opening' up might be very dangerous right now. And I do not trust Trump in making a non-political judgement.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Johnny Lawrence said:
And yeah, it's easy for me to shelter in place. I'm financially secure, own multiple homes, have plenty of money saved.

A lot of people in my industry are not so lucky. I already have friends who have left San Diego because they can't pay rent. Bartenders, servers, stage hands, sound and lighting guys - many of them live paycheck to paycheck. I've already had to reach into my own pocket to help some of my friends out. Another friend owns two bars. He's on the verge of having to close one of them down. This is a legendary(but small) music venue that employs a dozen or so people.

My parents estimate they've lost a couple million dollars as a result of this shut down.
Click to expand...
Exactly. People are making it like I'm selfish for not considering their life so precious that I should watch the republic squandered away for a slight adjustment to the increase of cases that can't even be proven to correlate with the lockdowns that are crippling society. I will very clamly get fucking sick to feed my kid. Millions of people will come out of their houses, covid or not, and break a fucking stay at home order when they run out of beans and tortillas.

I will gladly kill a motherfucker to give my son water if it comes to that.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
Provide a theoretical model for you assumptions at least, since you are arguing against established predictive models that have thus far proven to be accurate and that are based on solid theory.
Click to expand...
I don't even have to do that. There are examples. I have cited them literally dozens of times. We're past theory, it's well into practice.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
I don't even have to do that. There are examples. I have cited them literally dozens of times. We're past theory, it's well into practice.
Click to expand...
Statistics, not examples of anecdotes and theory goes hand in hand with practice and if the data does not agree with the theory, the theory is wrong. Like I said, the declarative is too general and you've been doing some dancing, tighten up the question in order to get a meaningful answer. Come up with a competing theoretical model if you want to challenge and existing widely accepted one. Science 101

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, you have made an extraordinary claim and made the fundamental error of speaking in absolute terms. There's not much point in getting into the weeds until these issues are addressed.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Kassiopeija said:
Well they make it that way so it displays the right information - which is the NEW number each day.
And this i necessary to being able to observe the current trend.
Therefore the data is not cumulative - but ofc, these statistics also exist.
Click to expand...
Nonetheless, there are now more than 190k confirmed cases in New York. 6337 just in the last 24 hours. They implemented one of the strictest lockdowns in the world over a month ago, when they had 328 cases. The average incubation period is 8 days.

6337 just in the last 24 hours and people have been under one of the strictest lockdowns in the world since over amonth ago.
 
jimihendrix1

jimihendrix1

Well-Known Member
The virus will continue to spread during a lockdown because people still have to go out to get food, medicine. Farmers have to go to get chemicals for farming. Drive through food is still available. Places deemed essential are still open

All these will still allow the virus to spread, but the lockdowns slow the spread, and stop the virus from completely overwhelming hospitals.

Lockdowns do work.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
examples of anecdotes
Click to expand...
NY has had 6337 cases in just 24 hours. They had 328 total confirmed cases on March 12 when they implemented one of ths strictest lockdowns in the world. There are over 190k now. Adding less than a hundred on day two of the lockdown looks the same on that graph as the 6337 since yesterday. You have no fucking clue what you're even talking about.

Your logarithmic graph is a fucking joke. We're crushing the economy for no fucking reason, which is goign to lead to starvation and possibly the collapse of the fucking society for that fucking graph.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top