View Full Version : Super spreader event is ok
Yet again.
https://youtu.be/dlfOc4UVcdw
So... we need multiple mass events to encourage people to "get out and vote."
But we need early mail-in voting to ensure everyone can vote because due to 'these unprecedented circumstances' not everyone can get out and vote...
Yep, makes perfect sense, nothing to see here, move along citizen.
Never forget, the self righteous authoritarian news d-bags and associated government officials were the first to call BS on the virus when it appeared, LONG before any conserv/right personalities did...
Also, as mentioned before... we need to shut down everything, but apparently a porous fabric facemask and some hand sanitizer means it's ok to mass-gather in a shoulder to shoulder space.
Logic 100/100 obviously. :rolleyes:
Of course, we all know the truth of it is, these folks "marching for justice" are expendable anyway. Just useful enough to further the agenda, but not needed beyond that.
But their own ego won't let them see it. It all feels so good to be caught up in the frenzy.
I'm just here to see if anybody has already done back-validation of the supposed cost of running Sturgis - whatever preposterous number they spouted out, because I highly doubt the data supports anything within an order of magnitude of their prognostication
Leftist indignation makes one impervious to coronavirus. Everybody knows that, sheesh!
HardToHandle
10-20-20, 20:39
I'm just here to see if anybody has already done back-validation of the supposed cost of running Sturgis - whatever preposterous number they spouted out, because I highly doubt the data supports anything within an order of magnitude of their prognostication
The real answer is no one knows.
I was privy to the State of SD’s public health preparation for Sturgis, which was not extensive but certainly restrained because of Gov. Noem’s politics.
There also were verifiable potential superspreader events at Sturgis. Check out the August 2020 public health releases here - https://doh.sd.gov/news/recent-releases.aspx. Kudos for South Dakota for not sweeping cases under the rug - they were up front about some jackass who was infectious all afternoon at One-Eyed Jack’s Saloon or the tattoo artist who were “sharing” at Sturgis. Likely a vast majority of the likely cases were not traced back or the elapsed time/travel made the linkages pretty questionable.
Anyone trying to determine Sturgis impacts is going to be making a guess. COVID’s asymptomatic spread and the context of a global pandemic, along with fairly high US attack rates driven by reopening colleges two-three weeks later thoroughly muddies the water.
My opinion is holding a Sturgis was dumb. If you disagree, you are dumb too.:p
@hardtohandle nature weeds out the weak, is that stupid? If you're not smart enough to protect yourself or you're worried, don't expect me to protect you. With a 99.97% survival rate I'm not about to change the way I live.
@hardtohandle nature weeds out the weak, is that stupid? If you're not smart enough to protect yourself or you're worried, don't expect me to protect you. With a 99.97% survival rate I'm not about to change the way I live.
It weeds out the old and sick people who are close to the stupid ones, actually. The only way to really protect yourself is to stay home, work remotely, shop online for delivered food, and not allow anyone from the outside into your home. I'm not going to live like a hermit because some Chinese people didn't cook their bat thoroughly.
On the flip side, we have idiots travelling across the country and back to attend weddings, protests, motorcycle rallies, and sporting events - all full of idiots that traveled across the country to be there.
Masks don't fix stupid and vaccine only works if enough people are inoculated.
Grand58742
10-21-20, 12:01
Just remember, it's never been about the virus...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/newsom-california-coronavirus-vaccine-independent-review
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said the state will independently review the Trump administration's anticipated coronavirus vaccine before approving distribution to its 39 million residents.
"Of course we won't take anyone's word for it," Newsom said Monday as he named 11 doctors and scientists to review any rollout of vaccines by the federal government or vaccine developers.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo similarly said in September that his state would conduct an independent review of the vaccine, citing politicization concerns, saying he is "not going to trust the federal government's opinion" during an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America."
"The first question is, is the vaccine safe? Frankly, I'm not going to trust the federal government's opinion and I wouldn't recommend to New Yorkers based on the federal government's opinion," Cuomo said at a press conference at the time. He later told ABC's "Good Morning America" that Americans should be "very skeptical" of taking the vaccine.
HardToHandle
10-21-20, 21:17
@hardtohandle nature weeds out the weak, is that stupid? If you're not smart enough to protect yourself or you're worried, don't expect me to protect you. With a 99.97% survival rate I'm not about to change the way I live.
Cool. I believe the Highway Patrol said the Sturgis traffic count was down 6% from the previous year, so lots of people agreed with you.
I absolutely appreciate lots of people depend on Sturgis for their financial wellbeing. The State of South Dakota served those people well.
And I also believed the State did a reasonable job of the public health work, so no fault there.
As for spreading an infectious disease around for some R&R with your drinking buddies? Same way I feel about the NBA.
Unnecessary.
Also remember South Dakota is using the Swedish model for COVID control. As of earlier this week, the Swedish COVID case fatality rate was 5.6%, which yields only a 94.4% survival rate.
.
Also remember South Dakota is using the Swedish model for COVID control. As of earlier this week, the Swedish COVID case fatality rate was 5.6%, which yields only a 94.4% survival rate.
But the vast majority of their 5.6% were in nursing homes
Sweden deaths by age
20-29 11
30-39 18
40-49 45
50-59 167
60-69 410
70-79 1272
80-90 2456
90+. 1541
Majority of dead are between 70 and 100 years old and the majority of those are between 80 and 90 years old
I'm not saying it's ok for older people to die. But saying the death rate is 5.6% while true is a little misleading.
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
sundance435
10-22-20, 10:14
It weeds out the old and sick people who are close to the stupid ones, actually. The only way to really protect yourself is to stay home, work remotely, shop online for delivered food, and not allow anyone from the outside into your home. I'm not going to live like a hermit because some Chinese people didn't cook their bat thoroughly.
On the flip side, we have idiots travelling across the country and back to attend weddings, protests, motorcycle rallies, and sporting events - all full of idiots that traveled across the country to be there.
Masks don't fix stupid and vaccine only works if enough people are inoculated.
This. It's usually the at-risk who come into contact with the idiots that suffer. Reason #4,568 we can't have nice things.
But the vast majority of their 5.6% were in nursing homes
Sweden deaths by age
20-29 11
30-39 18
40-49 45
50-59 167
60-69 410
70-79 1272
80-90 2456
90+. 1541
Majority of dead are between 70 and 100 years old and the majority of those are between 80 and 90 years old
I'm not saying it's ok for older people to die. But saying the death rate is 5.6% while true is a little misleading.
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
Just further reinforces the fact that the people who are getting infected at events like Sturgis are not feeling most of the impact - it's others around them, whether they know it or not. If someone went to Sturgis and quarantined for 2 weeks, good for them. If they came back and visited/worked at a nursing home, they probably killed some people because they are literally too stupid to hold themselves accountable.
I, too, am not living like a hermit, but I've adjusted my life to account for the fact that I will come in contact with at-risk people. I've tried to balance the risks vis a vis my behavior as best I can, which is all I would expect anyone to do. There are still far too many people not even doing that because they can't fathom how their actions might have real consequences for others.
HardToHandle
10-22-20, 19:22
But the vast majority of their 5.6% were in nursing homes
Sweden deaths by age
20-29 11
30-39 18
40-49 45
50-59 167
60-69 410
70-79 1272
80-90 2456
90+. 1541
Majority of dead are between 70 and 100 years old and the majority of those are between 80 and 90 years old
I'm not saying it's ok for older people to die. But saying the death rate is 5.6% while true is a little misleading.
I struggle with how a statement of fact, 5.6% case fatality rate, is somehow misleading. It is binary - 100% true, 0% false.
That is not meant as a personal attack, as I noticed the same issue on the reported COVID cases. Anyone with basic medical knowledge understands they are individually reported cases, but not necessarily always separate individuals. The more ignorant learn this and some how interpret their ignorance as an attempt to fool them. (Also that is the GRU’s message FWIW https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-Russia’s-Disinformation-and-Propaganda-Ecosystem_08-04-20.pdf)
No intent to deceive in the Swedish Case Fatality Rate but there is a certain tendency for people to minimize when they don’t like the fact or lack the cognitive process to interpret the information.
Same for a dead Swede or dead American. If they are dead, does it matter how old they were? They are cold on a slab. The bare fact does undercut the ethical attractiveness of the Swedish model of limited mitigation, which conservatively is 10x worse than the US fatality performance (and likely closer to 20x worse when time adjusted). Some folks don’t concern themselves with such moral or ethical issues; my opinion is that such public policy consideration is appropriate relative large recreational events such as Sturgis motorcycle rally. YMMV.
I struggle with how a statement of fact, 5.6% case fatality rate, is somehow misleading. It is binary - 100% true, 0% false.
That is not meant as a personal attack, as I noticed the same issue on the reported COVID cases. Anyone with basic medical knowledge understands they are individually reported cases, but not necessarily always separate individuals. The more ignorant learn this and some how interpret their ignorance as an attempt to fool them. (Also that is the GRU’s message FWIW https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Pillars-of-Russia’s-Disinformation-and-Propaganda-Ecosystem_08-04-20.pdf)
No intent to deceive in the Swedish Case Fatality Rate but there is a certain tendency for people to minimize when they don’t like the fact or lack the cognitive process to interpret the information.
Same for a dead Swede or dead American. If they are dead, does it matter how old they were? They are cold on a slab. The bare fact does undercut the ethical attractiveness of the Swedish model of limited mitigation, which conservatively is 10x worse than the US fatality performance (and likely closer to 20x worse when time adjusted). Some folks don’t concern themselves with such moral or ethical issues; my opinion is that such public policy consideration is appropriate relative large recreational events such as Sturgis motorcycle rally. YMMV.
Because it's a specific portion of the population. By saying it's 5.6% makes it seem like babies, teens, men, women, children, elderly....etc .. No matter where you look people of all races, ages and sexes are dropping dead.
It does matter how old they are. What are my chances if I'm a healthy 23 year old? What are my chances of I'm a bed ridden 93 year old? Now, keeping everything locked to save the 93 year old?
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.