|
Guest2553 posted:Without getting bogged down in nuanced language about what 'cull' and 'stupid' mean in a broader sociopolitical and historical context, the general point is that one can be generally against eugenics and specifically ok with it in this instance, while reserving sympathy and goodwill for those who are broadly seen as more deserving of it as a matter of practicality. "Deserve" is an imaginary concept created by humans and does not exist in reality.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
Shifty Nipples posted:"Deserve" is an imaginary concept created by humans and does not exist in reality. so are "love", "beauty", etc., but non-goons still frequently behave as if they do. crazy, I know
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 19:50
|
|
|
Guest2553 posted:Fine, "steadfastly against deliberate practices to improve the nebulous concept of 'genetic quality' but ok with idiot chuds directly self-selecting" For every chud actually facing the consequences of their actions, they'll take down several first responders and essential workers. The whole line of thought is loving stupid. It's fine to not have sympathy for assholes intentionally putting themselves and others at risk. It's not a good look to cheer for their infections, because they're not going to have the "self-selecting" effect you think they're going to have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 19:51
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:Earlier: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3556998 If this was the case I would expect the warmer/southern states would all be at the lower end of infections and death but that is not the case. I mean Florida is #8 in infections followed by Louisiana (also humid) and Texas.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
I'll do my effortpost making GBS threads on the IHME model later today.SerialKilldeer posted:I've been trying to use the IRS Get My Payment page to see what my status is and every darn time I get locked out. I'm pasting in the exact information that I put on my 2019 tax form, which I filed in March, and I don't know what I'm doing wrong. FlamingLiberal posted:I filed in March as well and I am having the same problem. Check the BFC income tax thread, people are discussing this a bit there. The problem is widespread, but there may be some specific things you can do or be aware of, depending on your circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 19:56
|
|
|
It is truly insane that people are still theorycrafting that warm weather will stop the spread of the virus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 19:57
|
|
|
friendly 2 da void posted:It is truly insane that people are still theorycrafting that warm weather will stop the spread of the virus. Listen, I think you'll see that this whole thing will be over in April when the warm weather gets here. The number will go to zero.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:If this was the case I would expect the warmer/southern states would all be at the lower end of infections and death but that is not the case. I mean Florida is #8 in infections followed by Louisiana (also humid) and Texas. Louisiana could be an outlier because of Mardi Gras, but Florida and Texas also have tons of people - their infections per capita 18th and 37th respectively.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
Wait wtf why are we talking about eugenics now? Are Darwin award jokes now tacit support for eugenics?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
All I see in the news is Doom and Gloom on one side and idiots trying to get sick on the other. Can someone tell me where we are in terms of knowledge about this virus, the best models to watch etc. I need something to calm my family because the constant barrage of back and forth information is giving them anxiety. This isn’t going to be over for a long time right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:07
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:All I see in the news is Doom and Gloom on one side and idiots trying to get sick on the other. Can you be a bit more specific about what kinds of questions you have? If you're looking specifically for calming arguments, I can provide a few- but it's going to be important that they don't cause folks to stop following safe practices.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:07
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Can you be a bit more specific about what kinds of questions you have? We’ve seen models showing 65k to millions dead. Trump - who is always wrong - is using the first model, but I expected the numbers to be higher by now for the Imperial college model. I keep seeing 12-18 months before a vaccine but that’s in best case right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
The interesting part about Louisiana was the infection map showed a clear line of progress west, then northwest as folks infected in New Orleans traveled along I-10 and spread along the major highways to the rest of the state. I do need to go get tested now though. I've developed a suspicious persistent shortness of breath beyond my usual seasonal allergies and I wouldn't be surprised if I managed to catch it because of all the shift coverage I've been doing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:11
|
|
|
Squinty posted:Louisiana could be an outlier because of Mardi Gras, but Florida and Texas also have tons of people - their infections per capita 18th and 37th respectively. That's kinda my point. Density of people matters more than anything rn. This seasonal poo poo is just gonna give people a false sense of security and they're going to flock to warm hubs and continue to infect everybody
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:13
|
|
|
Dr. Red Ranger posted:The interesting part about Louisiana was the infection map showed a clear line of progress west, then northwest as folks infected in New Orleans traveled along I-10 and spread along the major highways to the rest of the state. dont die red ranger, just jump in a sauna and the virus inside of you wont handle the pure strain steam
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:18
|
|
|
I'm prepping an effortpost on the forecasting models for later today. I'll give some short info here. 1. The IHME model that's seeing heavy promotion is functionally worthless- it was specified early on to attempt to anticipate peak hospital resource use, and it depends on a ton of assumptions that are both generally invalid, and specifically make the model unhelpful for predicting other things about the pandemic. I'll provide other models, but although they may be better, none of them will be great- and none of them are going to inform changes you need to make. 2. The Imperial College has a few models, but the one you're thinking of is the "what if no one does anything" one. We're already doing things, so it's very unlikely that deaths or infections will reach its levels. 3. Vaccines are likely to take about that long, but other drug treatments for people who have the virus are also under investigation. This includes stuff that's already approved for other diseases, so both testing and development and distribution could happen a lot faster. Something that's easy to forget is that this is still a disease with a relatively low death rate, especially if you're otherwise healthy. You do not want to get the virus, mind you, and should still follow all social distancing guidelines, but... This isn't doomsday. The world will not be ended by this outbreak. Other pandemics involved diseases that spread faster, killed harder, and did more lasting harm to survivors. You and your family are still unlikely to become infected, and if you are infected, you are unlikely to experience lasting harm. If your family is getting harmed by the constant inflow of information, then this is actually a very good reason to stop taking the information in. It's entirely possible to develop a maladaptive, harmful relationship to checking for information about something. From reading your posts in this thread, I think that you and yours may be at that point. The feeling that you need to check for this information is a desire for a sense that you can do something to control or mitigate it. Nothing is going to happen during this that will require immediate action; you need to become comfortable with the fact that there's nothing in particular for you to do. Consider proposing that all internet devices be put in a drawer except for a specific period of the day, and organizing other activities to occupy your family. Make a personal rule about not checking the news during work from home.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:dont die red ranger, just jump in a sauna and the virus inside of you wont handle the pure strain steam Ha, I know more than a few, well, less medically educated folks through the music scene out here and I've had to debunk that idea half a dozen times by now. They mean well but, nah man.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:25
|
|
|
GlassEye-Boy posted:What the does this even mean. Are you referring to the quarantine which is something that everyone should have done from the get go? Or are you just making a mysterious and vaguely threatening poo poo post about China. It means that the hypothesis that we're already infected at a population level at high percentages without having antibodies has been tried by having a city with previous infection, say the city where this originated, relax the lockdown measures in a small area, to see if infections occur or everyone is just immune. There's nothing mysterious or vaguely threatening about it. I regard the CCP as extremely utilitarian. There is nothing malicious about it. It's arrogant to assume, as many do, that the Chinese are dumb and have locked down cities far beyond what is necessary. Of course they have made attempts to lift the lock down measures to see if it was feasible. Any dream that we're overreacting rests on the assumption that the CCP is wrecking the economy of China without testing if there's a reason to do so. There's nothing paranoid about that. On the contrary, I find it absurd to just assume they are having the lockdown of all lockdowns because it gives them a totalitarian boner.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:25
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:dont die red ranger I 100% thought you were talking about this guy: https://powerrangers.fandom.com/wiki/Rio_Komiya On March 31st, Toei Productions reported during a press conference that Komiya had tested positive for COVID-19, after Komiya reported losing his sense of taste on the 24th,[1] and had stopped filming the weekend of the 28th.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:32
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:If your family is getting harmed by the constant inflow of information, then this is actually a very good reason to stop taking the information in. It's entirely possible to develop a maladaptive, harmful relationship to checking for information about something. From reading your posts in this thread, I think that you and yours may be at that point. was this supposed to be directed at someone
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:37
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:More info here: I'm not sure I understand the downside of increasing the sample size. Who cares about Gilead's intentions? That seems irrelevant. Won't increasing the sample size give us more realistic information regardless of the intention behind it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:38
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:All I see in the news is Doom and Gloom on one side and idiots trying to get sick on the other. You're right. Life will not go back to "normal" until we have a vaccine. Life will not go back to semi-normal (concerts and large sporting events) until we have universal contact tracing and testing for all who show fevers. IMHO, there is no good model to watch right now because the models are based on assumptions about social distancing that are not being followed in the real world and/or are dynamically changing in real time. I don't think it's helpful or productive to ask questions like "how many people will be dying in June" because it doesn't change how we should behave now. The best number to watch is the amount of tests conducted daily. These are the "source numbers" — official case counts and death counts flow from them, so if tests go down, case counts go down too, and vice versa. The other numbers to watch are the daily numbers of new cases and deaths are reported by local medical examiners and public health officials. These numbers represent a minimum count of the disease's progression, but they are an undercount because there are not enough tests to go around. You can find reliable numbers on these HERE: Our World in Data Right now, despite weeks of lockdown and a decline in testing, the USA is still racking up 30,000 new cases daily and higher and higher daily death tolls. This suggests that our current lockdown measures are not enough to meaningfully slow the spread of the virus. We will have to do more if we want new cases to drop enough so that we can get back to semi-normal. I recommend turning off the 24 hour news cycle and equipping yourself and your family with the best information you can find: raw numbers from local daily reports. I do not recommend unplugging completely because that will open you and your family up to narrative manipulation and misinformation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:40
|
|
|
Unoriginal Name posted:was this supposed to be directed at someone It's in response to pillowpants' information request, but it generally holds true about maladaptive information-seeking behavior by people in a crisis. We seek out information because we are looking for things that will give us a greater sense of control, or because on some unconscious level we believe there has to be some action we should take that we're missing. This makes us seek out more information, which raises our anxiety, which makes it harder to parse the credibility of sources, which makes us seek out more information...it can be a toxic feedback loop. A situation like this, involving a complex, little-understood threat, lots of misinformation, and isolation in your home with an internet feed is practically ideal circumstances to create that loop. runoverbobby posted:I'm not sure I understand the downside of increasing the sample size. Who cares about Gilead's intentions? That seems irrelevant. Won't increasing the sample size give us more realistic information regardless of the intention behind it? The short version is there are a few ways to abuse statistics by increasing the sample size like this. It can make the medication seem effective when it's not (or at least not effective enough to warrant approval). Well-made studies are supposed to select/justify their sample size in advance using something called a "power analysis" so that these abuses don't occur. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Apr 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:41
|
|
|
Unoriginal Name posted:was this supposed to be directed at someone Yes. Scroll up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
runoverbobby posted:I'm not sure I understand the downside of increasing the sample size. Who cares about Gilead's intentions? That seems irrelevant. Won't increasing the sample size give us more realistic information regardless of the intention behind it? If you're 95% confident of a result, get a negative, and then rather than go "ok that didn't work" you reshuffle or add participants in order to try to game out a win, it is a statistical certainty that eventually you will get a positive result that is simply the result of random chance. That's why you have to do the power calculation in advance rather than being allowed to alter the experiment design every time you don't like the outcome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
I wanna be clear that there can be arguable justifications for a mid-study sample increase, but the size of this one, and the circumstances, doesn't match any of the valid arguments I'd be comfortable with.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:It's in response to pillowpants' information request, but it generally holds true about maladaptive information-seeking behavior by people in a crisis. We seek out information because we are looking for things that will give us a greater sense of control, or because on some unconscious level we believe there has to be some action we should take that we're missing. I know you're not necessarily suggesting otherwise, but information DOES give us control. There ARE actions we should be taking that some of us are missing: socially distancing and (especially) advocating for increased testing and contact tracing from our local and federal governments. A lack of information is what leads people to believe that "things are fine", "we're overreacting", "cure is worse than the disease" etc. because their household is not personally suffering. Information gave me the power to convince my immunocompromised cousin to tell his boss he needed to WFH instead of going to his office job every day.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
People protesting in NH near me with REPENT and OPEN NH signs. Hope they all gently caress off permanently
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
friendly 2 da void posted:I know you're not necessarily suggesting otherwise, but information DOES give us control. There ARE actions we should be taking that some of us are missing: socially distancing and (especially) advocating for increased testing and contact tracing from our local and federal governments. has there been any new information that has helped anyone in like, weeks? I know one of the threads on SA has everyone is starting to smoke because they randomly decided that would cure them. Lacking any new information on new things people just go literally insane and make up endless folk remedies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:has there been any new information that has helped anyone in like, weeks? Some lit review concluded that smokers were underrepresented in some hospitals so a loving twitter checkmark claimed that was "extremely strong evidence" that smoking has a curative effect I would guess that people with the lung and heart conditions caused by smoking are probably the ones making up the found-dead-at-home statistic Tiny Timbs fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Apr 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I know one of the threads on SA has everyone is starting to smoke because they randomly decided that would cure them. Lacking any new information on new things people just go literally insane and make up endless folk remedies. What? That's ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:What? That's ridiculous. It's this thing: https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/1249787753543467008?s=20 Please do not listen to anyone on Twitter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:07
|
|
|
Fallom posted:Some lit review concluded that smokers were underrepresented in some hospitals so a loving twitter checkmark claimed that was "extremely strong evidence" that smoking has a curative effect yup. the covid-19 pneumonia they experience is far deadlier than a non smoker
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:07
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The short version is there are a few ways to abuse statistics by increasing the sample size like this. It can make the medication seem effective when it's not (or at least not effective enough to warrant approval). Well-made studies are supposed to select/justify their sample size in advance using something called a "power analysis" so that these abuses don't occur. In addition to that, larger sample sizes allow you to measure smaller effects due to decreased uncertainty. Expanding out the sample size 6 fold is a huge tell that the signal they're trying to measure, namely the efficacy of this drug, isn't already obvious with their existing sample of 400.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:What? That's ridiculous. You see, a non peer reviewed paper said that the amount of people that checked "I smoke" on the intake form for their entry into the ICU is lower than the population that smokes in the areas so bingo bongo smoking cures corona. (then it's easy to bait former smokers that are struggling to quit into smoking, so people are saying they are starting back to smoking because of it)
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
Blorange posted:In addition to that, larger sample sizes allow you to measure smaller effects due to decreased uncertainty. Expanding out the sample size 6 fold is a huge tell that the signal they're trying to measure, namely the efficacy of this drug, isn't already obvious with their existing sample of 400. I mean, what would the effect on 400 people be anyway? Depending on the age group the death rate is like .2%. anyone dying or not dying wouldn't really be statistically significant at that size.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
I would also guess that people aren't super inclined to be honest about their medical history when checking into a crowded ER after reading two months' worth of articles about triage plans
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:14
|
|
|
friendly 2 da void posted:I know you're not necessarily suggesting otherwise, but information DOES give us control. There ARE actions we should be taking that some of us are missing: socially distancing and (especially) advocating for increased testing and contact tracing from our local and federal governments. Sure, but someone who's been glued to the thread/media like this can afford to check it once a day, not constantly all day. Blorange posted:In addition to that, larger sample sizes allow you to measure smaller effects due to decreased uncertainty. Expanding out the sample size 6 fold is a huge tell that the signal they're trying to measure, namely the efficacy of this drug, isn't already obvious with their existing sample of 400. Yes, this is one of the abuse methods I was thinking of. effect sizes are measured against counterbalancing harms, such as side effects (though that gets screwy without full controls as in this study). P-hacking is another danger, as infamously happened with Bidil, but that's unlikely with a study of such high visibility- even the press tend to know that's a sign something's hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:14
|
|
|
Fallom posted:It's this thing: But where on SA is everyone suddenly taking up smoking?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
The idea that smoking has a positive effect on a lung disease is the stupidest Thing I heared to day. Come to think of it, HCL has been found ineffective. So how long will it take until Trump advises everyone to take up smoking instead? Of loving course you die faster, if your lungs are already a solid black mass of tar and you are out of breath from tieing your shoelaces.. cant cook creole bream fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Apr 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2020 21:20
|
|
