Comments by "JBW" (@jbw6823) on "Bill de Blasio: Trump is politicizing a pandemic" video.

Thr cdc includes in their databases comorbidity. Looking at that data gives you the best picture. Its large numbers. And you can give deaths rates by all sorts of factors including age race comorbid etc. "Provisional death counts deliver our most comprehensive picture of lives lost to COVID-19. These estimates are based on death certificates, which are the most reliable source of data and contain information not available anywhere else, including comorbid conditions, race and ethnicity, and place of death." https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
2
They are not epidemiologists and their analysis has been discredited by people who know wtf they are talking about. https://www.google.com/amp/s/sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/04/29/bakersfield-doctors-dan-erickson-artin-massihi-coronavirus-covid-19-claimed-condemned/amp/
2
My daughter is a high school teacher. Shes afraid.
2
@robertantonescu739 i dont think people want to chance it regardless of statistics. Additionally, one can act as an asymptomatic vector to other more vulnerable people. Its just going to take time with infection rates very low, well established therapeutics. and a vaccine.
2
@robertantonescu739 First, nowhere in my statement did I spread fear. I merely posited potential things people consider when deciding to go out. Secondly, she lives with us currently so its not a big deal for her. And actually shes been doing fine remotely with her students. A great side effect of this pandemic is that the remote system has been exercised. My point was that its going to take time for people to feel comfortable.Yes they need money. But perhaps they will adopt mechanisms to feel and be safer whilst being social. Some will. Some wont. As more people go out, more people will go out. Unless, of course, there is a rebound. We'll see.
2
@jeckjeck3119 redstate not red state. Its a vlog.
1
These guys are in Kern County, a very tiny teensy low population county in Ca. Its got more cows than people.. So their stats are very limited and subject to great errors due to a limited population. Theyve only had 11 deaths in Kern County.
1
Reported covid deaths are 70k plus including comorbid. The widely quoted flu deaths of max -60000 per year also includes comorbid. However, the 60k number is extrapolated not actual deaths. Actual verified flu deaths are more like 15000. Including comorbidity. Therefore, Covid has a much higher actual death rate. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/
1
You really wanna bet your life on what these guys say?
1
@zpwilde what do you do?
1
@robertantonescu739 Im in Silicon Valley. We have about 2000 cases in a population of 2 million. So about 1 on 1000 are infected, but it will probably drop.. The odds of getting murdered are 1 in 18000. It depends where you live and when you sample.
1
@kandemeyer6197 What would it take for you to feel comfortable with sending your kids back? What are the set of conditions ?
1
Heck. From what I hear, she should get hazard pay for her job even without the virus factor! I imagine people who've had to homeschool their kids during this period have a greater appreciation for teachers.
1
@robertantonescu739 where do you get your data? My problem with death and infection rates of covid are that they are highly variable depending upon many variables including country. Additionally, the lack of testing and the unproven accuracy of tests are problematic. Also you provide no references for your conventional death rate data. The flakiness of covid of death data is probably part of the reason its hard to convince others. Additionally, you dont address or take into consideration psychological issues. Stating numbers is insufficiient. For example, 40% of people dont believe in evolution. Religion is irrational but pervasive etc.etc. Also equating risks is not a good way to compare things. Car deaths are not contagious. A good thing to do is first ASK people what their concerns are and working thru those. Telling people they are irrational does not work. Theres all sorts of psychologucal issues with denial. Research that a bit. Lots of wikipedia articles well referenced.
1
@robertantonescu739 btw. Genericallyvreferencing "the media" is not sufficient. There are all sorts of media of varying quality and topic focus. Im a science guy so I tend toward those. For popular media, take a look at the bias and veracity analysis by adfontesmedia.com
1
@robertantonescu739 one more factor in analysing anything properly is understanding your own personal biases and common psychological issues in perception of issues. Look at problens around "confirmation bias" and "motivated reasoning". Overall scientific method is the best thing we have so far cause it helps filters out those personal effects and affects.
1
@robertantonescu739 do me a favor and dont lay it on me all at once. State your sources as you use them. This interface, altho really shitty, might allow numbering of references after a text as is standardly done
1
@robertantonescu739 please be careful about using the term "the media" .You gotta be specific and ask and quote who.what when where, why and how. Its not a monolith. Youll hear something completely different from Fox vs what you hear from MSNBC. And theres tv, print, email, internet sources all qualifying as media. Like I said, take a look at adfontesmedia.com.
1
On frustration about denialism, look at whats suggested when dealing with climate change deniers. For example.. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200108160312.htm
1
@robertantonescu739 ok. Are you in college? why are u writing a paper. Btw, this interface sucks. Id go drive over to YouTube and tell them so but Im locked down !
1
@robertantonescu739 my daughter is a high school english teacher. She can check your grammar! Sure gives me enuf shit.
1