KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
4 years ago
There are very compelling charts/graph etc in the article which, I remain, to stupid to figure out how to post...highlights of text below.

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/horowitz-cdc-confirms-remarkably-low-coronavirus-death-rate-media/ 
Horowitz: The CDC confirms remarkably low coronavirus death rate. Where is the media?
Daniel Horowitz · May 22, 2020

Most people are more likely to wind up six feet under because of almost anything else under the sun other than COVID-19.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html  that should be earth-shattering to the narrative of the political class, yet it will go into the thick pile of vital data and information about the virus that is not getting out to the public. For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%. Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.

Plus, ultimately we might find out that the IFR is even lower because numerous studies and hard counts of confined populations have shown a much higher percentage of asymptomatic cases. Simply adjusting for a 50% asymptomatic rate would drop their fatality rate to 0.2% – exactly the rate of fatality Dr. John Ionnidis of Stanford University projected.

More importantly, as I mentioned before, the overall death rate is meaningless because the numbers are so lopsided. Given that at least half of the deaths were in nursing homes, a back-of-the-envelope estimate would show that the infection fatality rate for non-nursing home residents would only be 0.1% or 1 in 1,000. And that includes people of all ages and all health statuses outside of nursing homes. Since nearly all of the deaths are those with comorbidities.

The CDC estimates the death rate from COVID-19 for those under 50 is 1 in 5,000 for those with symptoms, which would be 1 in 6,725 overall, but again, almost all those who die have specific comorbidities or underlying conditions. Those without them are more likely to die in a car accident. And schoolchildren, whose lives, mental health, and education we are destroying, are more likely to get struck by lightning
In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK
Cheesey
4 years ago

Again, you ignore the science dude. Many countries are in the clinical trial stages of COVID-19 vaccines, with medical journals (Lancet, for example, less than a week ago) reporting the clinical trial results so far have been promising for these vaccines. Governments of countries are literally underwriting scientific efforts to develop a vaccine at a remarkable rate, not to mention the investment banks underwriting deals for life science companies working towards COVID-19 treatments and vaccines in an otherwise dead period for global capital markets. Moderna literally had a $1.3 billion dollar public offering last week on the strength of its vaccine trials with the optimistic forecasts having an emergency vaccine ready by December.

There will be a vaccine. There is literally ample evidence suggesting this, along with actual clinical trials that have resulted in anti-bodies developing in those that were given the vaccines in trials. The common-cold cure has nothing to do with what the science says right now about COVID-19.

I get you have an opinion - but there isn't a point in asserting your opinion on vaccines as fact. Particularly when the science doesn't back up the opinion strongly. And I don't mean to suggest your conclusion is wrong - I'm all for opening the country up before then (and Georgia is a prime example of opening up not being doom and gloom, despite what many (including I) thought was a wrong decision to open up early). But your opinion on a COVID-19 vaccine is not supported by the facts.

Originally Posted by: all_about_da_packers 



Dude, 🤪 yes, they are saying they are close to a vaccine. But “close” doesn’t mean it’s a done deal, does it? And “science” believes we evolved from a rock “millions of years ago”. So my faith in science is not 100%.
Do I hope you are right, and they come up with one soon? Yup! But being as they are trying to do this quickly, how will they have any idea the long term side effects of the vaccine? They usually take years to come up with vaccines, and take years testing it to see what it might do to people long term.
I do hope you are right.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
4 years ago

A few days ago I heard the Fed is considering reducing the listed side effects to the few that are probable and serious. (My words not theirs)
Seems that they are concerned the side effect message is being lost on the masses with so many stupid and unlikely ones.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



I think that's a good idea. Someone ignorant like myself hears possible death as a side effect for medicine for diarrhea (just a random example, not true) I'm gonna be like yeah ya know what, I'm gonna just deal with the squirts for a few days, eat some Chicken Noodle Soup and call it good. When in fact driving a car also has a side effect of possible death and that possibility could be ten fold higher!

One thing regarding vaccines and such is I ask the doctor what the Number Needed to Treat is. When the doctor tells me my daughters need X, Y, Z shots, she knows to give me sheets of information for me to read over. I then look up studies (be careful doing this, not every study includes the data or sample size!) and ask the doctor. One of them was I read some bad side effects for a vaccine she recommended. She told me its true, those side effects do happen ... WHEN .. the 2nd and 3rd shots are not taken at the appropriate time. She said as long as 2nd shot is taken X weeks after first, and 3rd shot taken Y weeks after 2nd shot, the risks drop dramatically. I was able to find information that supported that.

I hate doing that to the doctor (who is THE professional), but a lot of times it is more so for my peace of mind. I just wish it was easier to find truthful information.

When it comes to COVID-19 I struggle with taking a vaccine for it. I want to because I don't want to be a carrier that give sit to someone else who cannot battle through it. I don't want to because scientifically altering things in my body feels wrong. But, I eat processed shit so... just shows you how little I know about all of it. lol.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
4 years ago



I hate doing that to the doctor (who is THE professional), but a lot of times it is more so for my peace of mind. I just wish it was easier to find truthful information.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 


The Dr probably wishes she had more patients/parents like you. Most don't give a damn or put the whole burden on the Dr when it's really your child.
The treatment wasn't available when my daughter was young. A few years ago I saw one of the commercials and told my wife, "damn, I hope we didn't mess this up. How did we miss getting her the treatment?" She told me it wasn't available then.

So, good job Z.
UserPostedImage
KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
4 years ago
Aside here.

Does it bug any of you that the television ads for any drug spend 15+ seconds talking about the side effect. It's a frigging prescription drug!!! The Dr. prescribing it and the pharmacist should both know what they are and they are on the label.

The extra 15 seconds in ads just drives up the cost of drugs.

Before you take any drug, or consume anything for that matter, find out the side effects. If you don't think they are worth the risks, don't take them.
In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK
Cheesey
4 years ago

Aside here.

Does it bug any of you that the television ads for any drug spend 15+ seconds talking about the side effect. It's a frigging prescription drug!!! The Dr. prescribing it and the pharmacist should both know what they are and they are on the label.

The extra 15 seconds in ads just drives up the cost of drugs.

Before you take any drug, or consume anything for that matter, find out the side effects. If you don't think they are worth the risks, don't take them.

Originally Posted by: KRK 



Did you also notice that while they are telling you the 30 side effects, they play “cutesy” music and show smiling happy people?😁
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
4 years ago

Does it bug any of you that the television ads for any drug spend 15+ seconds talking about the side effect.

Originally Posted by: KRK 


It's required by law. And all it does is foment distrust and anxiety.
UserPostedImage
Cheesey
4 years ago

It's required by law. And all it does is foment distrust and anxiety.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



That’s ok......I’m sure they have a pill for that!
😂😂😂
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
4 years ago

It's required by law. And all it does is foment distrust and anxiety.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



Especially to those who have no damn clue whatsoever. (such as me)
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
4 years ago

It's required by law. And all it does is foment distrust and anxiety.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



I've been listening to a podcast by an Adman out of Canada called "Under The Influence". It's pretty interesting. He has mentioned several times about the Feds requiring equal time for listing the side effects of meds. (I have heard 9 seasons worth of episodes in the past month so I can not quote him verbatim.) Canadian laws are much more restrictive when it comes to Rx ads but I don't remember the particulars.
UserPostedImage
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    beast (4h) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?
    Martha Careful (9h) : meh
    Zero2Cool (13h) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026
    Zero2Cool (13h) : It's so awesome.
    Zero2Cool (13h) : new site fan shout post fast
    wpr (16h) : Slow posting in Fan shout.
    wpr (16h) : Only 4
    wpr (16h) : Only 4
    Zero2Cool (19h) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!
    dfosterf (19h) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am
    wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days
    beast (18-Apr) : 6 days
    wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
    Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
    Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
    Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
    Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
    dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move
    dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish
    Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need
    dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.
    dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.
    Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.
    dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation
    Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what
    Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife
    Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately
    Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.
    dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.
    Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not
    Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    17-Apr / Random Babble / wpr

    16-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

    11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

    2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

    28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.