State your opinion on COVID-19

On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 2:23:55 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/17/2020 1:20 PM, wrote:
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 10:02:49 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/17/2020 11:35 AM, wrote:

The "excess mortality" for the US is about .3 per 100,000 or 960 people for this country. Accepting that there are fewer traffic deaths but vastly higher alcohol and suicides due to the lockdown any fool could see that the overwhelming majority of deaths were NATURALLY occurring from pre-existing health conditions.

Saturday's paper suggests some 30,000 excess deaths, not
960. Did you mean 'county' rather than 'country' perhaps?

And whichever it is (We may know more much later. Or not.)
the problem of 'garbage in= garbage out' remains. It's at
least very early for any after action report.


What I have been saying from the start is that everything is being based upon CDC statistics which have now been shown to be garbage.

This is why I want the CDC closed down and the statistics that they kept be subcontracted out to universities which are far less likely to be politicized ...

Tom, you're not keeping up with the right wing political message!
According to the right, universities are evil, liberal places infested
with democrats.

So it just won't do to entrust the data to universities. Heck, they're
likely to look at (gasp!) facts!

We know you don't like those trained and tested medical researchers,
statisticians, mathematicians, etc. at the CDC. And God forbid we should
let the WHO researchers have a say!

There's only one solution: Once again, we should turn the problem over
to an unemployed high school dropout with no experience at all in
processing relevant data. We can find one in California.

Hey, as we know, he needs the money. Grocery prices are up!

--
- Frank Krygowski

No Frank, try as you might you communists are not able to convert people to your socialist ideals. Most people are going to graduate and then they don't like the idea of the government owning everything and telling them what they can do and cannot. And after this election you and your kind will see exactly what people other than I, think of you.

wrote:
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 12:14:45 PM UTC-7, Ralph Barone wrote:
wrote:

Ralph, the normal deaths in the population is 16.4 per 100,000 per week.
The present death rate is 16.7. It is a complicated measurement since so
many people are presently dying because of auto deaths, suicides, delayed
surgeries and a sudden increase in deaths from alcoholism.

Some units or additional context in your first posting would have been
nice.

The important thing is that I GAVE you the rates of deaths and during
this so-called "Crisis" that additional deaths are only 1,500 or so and not 80,000+.

This illness is hardly worse that a bad cold and while they are screaming
"KEEP THE SHUTDOWN" infections and deaths are dropping.

It is a false report that "infections are increasing" because all that
means is that more testing is being accomplished and hence more positives are showing up.

Now remember what I said about this being pure bull**** from the CDC and
then look at this chart from John's Hopkins school of medicine
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/new-cases

The other countries on this map have no political points to make and so
this misreporting of new cases or deaths due to the Wuhan Virus isn't necessary.


So the US has five times the population of the UK and 3 times the reported
deaths. Where is the egregious misrepresentation here? Could it be that
your political system is broken and Americans aren’t very good at following
instructions?

On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 10:53:32 AM UTC-7, Ralph Barone wrote:
wrote:
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 12:14:45 PM UTC-7, Ralph Barone wrote:
wrote:

Ralph, the normal deaths in the population is 16.4 per 100,000 per week.
The present death rate is 16.7. It is a complicated measurement since so
many people are presently dying because of auto deaths, suicides, delayed
surgeries and a sudden increase in deaths from alcoholism.

Some units or additional context in your first posting would have been
nice.

The important thing is that I GAVE you the rates of deaths and during
this so-called "Crisis" that additional deaths are only 1,500 or so and not 80,000+.

This illness is hardly worse that a bad cold and while they are screaming
"KEEP THE SHUTDOWN" infections and deaths are dropping.

It is a false report that "infections are increasing" because all that
means is that more testing is being accomplished and hence more positives are showing up.

Now remember what I said about this being pure bull**** from the CDC and
then look at this chart from John's Hopkins school of medicine
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/new-cases

The other countries on this map have no political points to make and so
this misreporting of new cases or deaths due to the Wuhan Virus isn't necessary.


So the US has five times the population of the UK and 3 times the reported
deaths. Where is the egregious misrepresentation here? Could it be that
your political system is broken and Americans aren’t very good at following
instructions?

As I've explained several times, the actual measurements of deaths are so wildly different from country to country that you can't possibly reach any decisions based on that statistic.

Sweden appears to have a much larger percentage of deaths per capita than Norway who measure theirs based upon the actual causes of deaths.

On Mon, 18 May 2020 10:27:38 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 12:14:45 PM UTC-7, Ralph Barone wrote:
wrote:

Ralph, the normal deaths in the population is 16.4 per 100,000 per week.
The present death rate is 16.7. It is a complicated measurement since so
many people are presently dying because of auto deaths, suicides, delayed
surgeries and a sudden increase in deaths from alcoholism.

Some units or additional context in your first posting would have been
nice.

The important thing is that I GAVE you the rates of deaths and during this so-called "Crisis" that additional deaths are only 1,500 or so and not 80,000+.

This illness is hardly worse that a bad cold and while they are screaming "KEEP THE SHUTDOWN" infections and deaths are dropping.

It is a false report that "infections are increasing" because all that means is that more testing is being accomplished and hence more positives are showing up.

Now remember what I said about this being pure bull**** from the CDC and then look at this chart from John's Hopkins school of medicine https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/new-cases

The other countries on this map have no political points to make and so this misreporting of new cases or deaths due to the Wuhan Virus isn't necessary.

In 1861 - 1865 the U.S. fought the "Civil War, said to be the
deadliest war in U.S. History, when some 755,000 were killed. In
simple terms the death rate was 550 a week or 78.57 per day.

In 1955 - 1975 the U.S. Engaged in the Vietnam "war" and while some
58,209 died in total during the "war" 1968 proved to be the most
deadly with some 16,899 dying, or a rate of 46 per day. It is of
interest to note that these figures were great enough to panic the
U.S. and up to 20,000 fled the country to avoid serving in the
Military and "being sent to Vietnam to die".

The first death recorded in the U.S. due to the current Coronavirus
pandemic was on, in the U.S., seems to have been on 1 march, and as
of May 18, 2020, 21:57 GMT, some 79 days later, 91,730 had died, a
casualty rate of 1,161 a day.

It would appear that the current virus pandemic, based on death rates
as is done in time of war, is the most catastrophic event in the
history of the United States.
--
cheers,

John B.

On 15/5/20 11:25 am, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/14/2020 8:43 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2020 16:44:15 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:


Whatever would you and Frank do for entertainment if you didn't have
poor Tom to reply to or lead on?

LOL and cheers

Probably have to take on those Canadian's that ride around on unpaved
paths out there in the woods :-)

Don't youÂ* people realize that back in prehistoric times, the late
1890's and early 1900's bicyclists were frothing at the mouth, jumping
down and screaming that they just had to have smooth roads.... and now
they'veÂ* got them why do y'all run about out there in the bushes?

I've wondered about that when thinking about the popularity of mountain
bikes and now, gravel bikes.

To each his own, I guess. I'm not shy about riding gravel or dirt when
it looks interesting or convenient, like a short cut. But I find it _so_
much more pleasant to ride on decent paved surfaces. In particular,
mountain biking just beats me up.

Admittedly, I'm blessed by a dense network of fairly quiet country
roads. I suppose if a person's in a place where most paved roads are
very busy _and_ there's a network of quiet gravel roads, they might
prefer to avoid asphalt.

But I do think many "no asphalt" people are just afraid of all motor
vehicle traffic.

(Not Sir, of course. He's described his mid-city commuting.)


I bought a gravel bike so that I have more variety of routes and places
to explore. I often ride a mix of bitumen and gravel, and the MTB is
just a slug on bitumen. Furthermore my gravel bike has 3 water bottles
in the main triangle, which is really handy around here in hot weather.
It's also good for towing my shopping trailer.

--
JS

On 5/18/2020 4:52 PM, wrote:
On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 10:53:32 AM UTC-7, Ralph Barone wrote:
wrote:
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 12:14:45 PM UTC-7, Ralph Barone wrote:
wrote:

Ralph, the normal deaths in the population is 16.4 per 100,000 per week.
The present death rate is 16.7. It is a complicated measurement since so
many people are presently dying because of auto deaths, suicides, delayed
surgeries and a sudden increase in deaths from alcoholism.

Some units or additional context in your first posting would have been
nice.

The important thing is that I GAVE you the rates of deaths and during
this so-called "Crisis" that additional deaths are only 1,500 or so and not 80,000+.

This illness is hardly worse that a bad cold and while they are screaming
"KEEP THE SHUTDOWN" infections and deaths are dropping.

It is a false report that "infections are increasing" because all that
means is that more testing is being accomplished and hence more positives are showing up.

Now remember what I said about this being pure bull**** from the CDC and
then look at this chart from John's Hopkins school of medicine
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/new-cases

The other countries on this map have no political points to make and so
this misreporting of new cases or deaths due to the Wuhan Virus isn't necessary.


So the US has five times the population of the UK and 3 times the reported
deaths. Where is the egregious misrepresentation here? Could it be that
your political system is broken and Americans aren’t very good at following
instructions?

As I've explained several times, the actual measurements of deaths are so wildly different from country to country that you can't possibly reach any decisions based on that statistic.

Then what source of data are we to use if we want to really understand
the effects of this virus?

Are we to accept only the "data" given without references by an
unemployed high school dropout? Is that the best there is?


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/18/2020 5:20 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2020 10:27:38 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 12:14:45 PM UTC-7, Ralph Barone wrote:
wrote:

Ralph, the normal deaths in the population is 16.4 per 100,000 per week.
The present death rate is 16.7. It is a complicated measurement since so
many people are presently dying because of auto deaths, suicides, delayed
surgeries and a sudden increase in deaths from alcoholism.

Some units or additional context in your first posting would have been
nice.

The important thing is that I GAVE you the rates of deaths and during this so-called "Crisis" that additional deaths are only 1,500 or so and not 80,000+.

This illness is hardly worse that a bad cold and while they are screaming "KEEP THE SHUTDOWN" infections and deaths are dropping.

It is a false report that "infections are increasing" because all that means is that more testing is being accomplished and hence more positives are showing up.

Now remember what I said about this being pure bull**** from the CDC and then look at this chart from John's Hopkins school of medicine https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/new-cases

The other countries on this map have no political points to make and so this misreporting of new cases or deaths due to the Wuhan Virus isn't necessary.

In 1861 - 1865 the U.S. fought the "Civil War, said to be the
deadliest war in U.S. History, when some 755,000 were killed. In
simple terms the death rate was 550 a week or 78.57 per day.

In 1955 - 1975 the U.S. Engaged in the Vietnam "war" and while some
58,209 died in total during the "war" 1968 proved to be the most
deadly with some 16,899 dying, or a rate of 46 per day. It is of
interest to note that these figures were great enough to panic the
U.S. and up to 20,000 fled the country to avoid serving in the
Military and "being sent to Vietnam to die".

The first death recorded in the U.S. due to the current Coronavirus
pandemic was on, in the U.S., seems to have been on 1 march, and as
of May 18, 2020, 21:57 GMT, some 79 days later, 91,730 had died, a
casualty rate of 1,161 a day.

It would appear that the current virus pandemic, based on death rates
as is done in time of war, is the most catastrophic event in the
history of the United States.


The losses in 'our recent unpleasantness' was from a much
smaller population, something just over 30 million
altogether in 1860.

The Hong Kong 1969 influenza however killed som e100
thousand of a US population just over 200 million (versus
about 330 million today.)


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Mon, 18 May 2020 18:50:09 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/18/2020 5:20 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2020 10:27:38 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 12:14:45 PM UTC-7, Ralph Barone wrote:
wrote:

Ralph, the normal deaths in the population is 16.4 per 100,000 per week.
The present death rate is 16.7. It is a complicated measurement since so
many people are presently dying because of auto deaths, suicides, delayed
surgeries and a sudden increase in deaths from alcoholism.

Some units or additional context in your first posting would have been
nice.

The important thing is that I GAVE you the rates of deaths and during this so-called "Crisis" that additional deaths are only 1,500 or so and not 80,000+.

This illness is hardly worse that a bad cold and while they are screaming "KEEP THE SHUTDOWN" infections and deaths are dropping.

It is a false report that "infections are increasing" because all that means is that more testing is being accomplished and hence more positives are showing up.

Now remember what I said about this being pure bull**** from the CDC and then look at this chart from John's Hopkins school of medicine https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/new-cases

The other countries on this map have no political points to make and so this misreporting of new cases or deaths due to the Wuhan Virus isn't necessary.

In 1861 - 1865 the U.S. fought the "Civil War, said to be the
deadliest war in U.S. History, when some 755,000 were killed. In
simple terms the death rate was 550 a week or 78.57 per day.

In 1955 - 1975 the U.S. Engaged in the Vietnam "war" and while some
58,209 died in total during the "war" 1968 proved to be the most
deadly with some 16,899 dying, or a rate of 46 per day. It is of
interest to note that these figures were great enough to panic the
U.S. and up to 20,000 fled the country to avoid serving in the
Military and "being sent to Vietnam to die".

The first death recorded in the U.S. due to the current Coronavirus
pandemic was on, in the U.S., seems to have been on 1 march, and as
of May 18, 2020, 21:57 GMT, some 79 days later, 91,730 had died, a
casualty rate of 1,161 a day.

It would appear that the current virus pandemic, based on death rates
as is done in time of war, is the most catastrophic event in the
history of the United States.


The losses in 'our recent unpleasantness' was from a much
smaller population, something just over 30 million
altogether in 1860.

The Hong Kong 1969 influenza however killed som e100
thousand of a US population just over 200 million (versus
about 330 million today.)

While I do not dispute your numbers I think that you misrepresent the
picture.

But perhaps I'm wrong. So tell us why so many were running to Canada
to avoid a death rate of 46/day during the worst year of the so called
war? It might also be noted that only about 30% of the troops
stationed in Vietnam were draftees.
Or why one reads in the news about numbers of deaths in Afghanistan or
Iraq or any of the other strange places that the U.S. seems to have
"invaded". After all in terms of the U.S. population they are, well,
not even peanuts.

Rationalize it anyway that makes you feel better, but the fact remains
that death rates, to date, due to the virus outnumber losses due to
combat by a factor of ~200% in the worst war that the U.S. ever fought
and a factor of 400% over any war in living memory.

I might add that you have, in the past, enumerated the deaths in U.S.
hospitals as tragedies. You didn't say "But what the Hell! They were
only 0.06% of the population". Or bicycle deaths. Good Lord! They
seem to be about 800 a year, but to be safe lets call it 900
annually. Or about 0.0002% by population, certainly such a low
percentage can be safely ignored.
--
cheers,

John B.

On 5/18/2020 6:38 PM, James wrote:

I bought a gravel bike so that I have more variety of routes and places
to explore.Â* I often ride a mix of bitumen and gravel, and the MTB is
just a slug on bitumen.Â* Furthermore my gravel bike has 3 water bottles
in the main triangle, which is really handy around here in hot weather.
It's also good for towing my shopping trailer.

I certainly agree about mountain bikes being "slugs" on paved roads.

I have a friend who is not an avid cyclist, although he did some 1000
mile camping tours when much younger. He likes riding under a full moon,
and usually invites me to ride with him. I use one of my road bikes, he
uses his mountain bike. In fact, he uses it everywhere, except off road.
He has no interest in riding on dirt.

At one time, he mentioned that he still had his 1970s Trek touring bike,
but it needed lots of work. I said that bike would be much more
appropriate for his riding and offered to overhaul it for him. And I put
many hours into a complete overhaul. (I may have mentioned having to
disassemble the Campy touring rear derailleur to get it working.)

He came to get the completed bike, test rode it once around my block and
said he didn't like it. It didn't feel stable enough for him. AFAIK he's
never ridden it since.

I've suggested he at least get slick road tires for his mountain bike,
but so far he's resisted even that. Ah well!

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Mon, 18 May 2020 21:42:56 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 5/18/2020 6:38 PM, James wrote:

I bought a gravel bike so that I have more variety of routes and places
to explore.Â* I often ride a mix of bitumen and gravel, and the MTB is
just a slug on bitumen.Â* Furthermore my gravel bike has 3 water bottles
in the main triangle, which is really handy around here in hot weather.
It's also good for towing my shopping trailer.

I certainly agree about mountain bikes being "slugs" on paved roads.

If you ride nobbies.

I have a friend who is not an avid cyclist, although he did some 1000
mile camping tours when much younger. He likes riding under a full moon,
and usually invites me to ride with him. I use one of my road bikes, he
uses his mountain bike. In fact, he uses it everywhere, except off road.
He has no interest in riding on dirt.

At one time, he mentioned that he still had his 1970s Trek touring bike,
but it needed lots of work. I said that bike would be much more
appropriate for his riding and offered to overhaul it for him. And I put
many hours into a complete overhaul. (I may have mentioned having to
disassemble the Campy touring rear derailleur to get it working.)

He came to get the completed bike, test rode it once around my block and
said he didn't like it. It didn't feel stable enough for him. AFAIK he's
never ridden it since.

Did you set it up for racing or touring?

I've suggested he at least get slick road tires for his mountain bike,
but so far he's resisted even that. Ah well!

Based on experience, I won't tour with some one using slicks. They are
always first off the cab for lone cyclist accidents. Loss of traction and
they are flat on the deck. YMMV.

As I ride an "mtb" all the time, I use a tyre that has a centre ridge and
that does fine 995 of the time. FWIW, mst of our sealed roads as rough
seals and the ultra smooth "hotmix"(finer stone) is only on the major
highways.