Coronavirus Death Toll Estimation USA

Didn't you know, protesting for a Democrat cause confers temporary immunity to COVID-19. Voting for them confers immunity on a two year basis. Voting against them makes you 1000% more likely to contract it, especially if you go to a Church, that adds another 1000% to the increase.

You forgot the 150% increase for believing Republican anti mask propaganda.

Logic failure divide by zero.

If you don't have symptoms it's because your body has successfully contained and fought off the viral invasion before it had a chance to spread itself around. If your body fails to initially detect / contain a viral infection, it will then start aggressively responding to that infection, which cause's what we call "symptoms". The specific symptoms are based on the location and nature of the infection, you don't get chest congestion from a stomach virus.

Typhoid Mary cases are extremely ridiculously stupendously rare and result from genetic mutations that allowed a person to be infected but not harmed by a particular type of virus.

What anti-mask propaganda? Last I checked it was the Democrats that said people should continue gathering in public back in January / February. Telling everyone that this was no big deal and that everyone, and especially that evil vile Trump, was racist for not trusting China when it said everything is fine.

My wife's Korean, we've had masks for years now in case of emergency. When ***hit the fan she had her family send us the better ones with replaceable filters that could be worn everyday.

You're wrong about the lack of asymptomatic spreaders.

Countries that actually do contact tracing see that 25-50% of COVID infections are caused by people that were asymptomatic at the time.

lol, still running with this *** eh? I mean, if you guys want to try to claim the Democrats are "anti-mask" and the Republicans aren't, that is some serious desperation, and high quality entertainment for our side. I don't put anything past the covid deniers at this point.

He is wrong about everything, as usual.

Its not just that he was a whole month off, he was far too aggressive pushing through the phases of reopening, he ignored the data (1k cases per day, everything is fine!) and weakened the local governments ability to slow the spread.

In mid-May, Abbott issued an executive order forbidding cities from enforcing shelter in place and mask wearing orders. All they could do was issue recommendations, which could be ignored without facing any legal consequences. The results have been devastating for Texas. In the last 4 days we have added 23k cases. That was about the total the state had when the too early reopening started. Fast forward and now we are closing in on 130k with over 5k hospitalizations. Houston is so overwhelmed the Children's Hospital started admitting adults.

I think that fact finally got Abbott off his *** and he closed down all the bars, which have become magnets for covid countrywide. He also closed inter-tubing locations, which I'm so sure will have a huge impact as well (<.<) He also reduced restaurant capacity to 50% (down from 75), but thats not enough. He needs to go back to Phase 2 at the very least, and should close down more nonessential magnets for young people like movie theaters, gyms, arcades, etc. At least until the hospitalizations go down. It might only be a few weeks if he acts now.

He also needs to mandate masks. If you leave the house you have to wear a mask. Get over this Trump inspired mask denying ***. It doesn't hurt anyone to wear a mask. Being able to social distance is not an excuse to not wear a mask.

Say WHAT??? Where is your MD PhD degree in epidemiology?

Also this covid isn't typhus. Typhus is bacterial FFS.

P. S. Welcome back. I haven't been reading much fantasy lately.

Yes, because there are actual, calculable ways to be able the actual people who have contracted/spread Covid due to simply thinking the media has used this epidemic to destroy the economy further than it needed to go to take way the one major thing Trump could hang his hat on.

Yes, people should wear masks, even if it's MAY help. It's not a hard thing to do, they aren't expensive.

But people like you stating this THEN not even acknowledging publicly that hundreds of thousands of "protestors" suddenly gathering in the streets, physically ignoring social distancing "suggestions" are not many times MORE of a threat to spread Covid than a few conservative pundits whining about masks are truly what's wrong with this country.

So you forget the fact when Trump stated to end flights from China due to Covid, Schumer called him racist in late January? You forget that Pelosi encouraged people to gather in Chinatown in SF to show solidarity against Trump's supposed, "racism?"

I mean, I realize you guys mentally edit all news and facts and pick and choose the parts that help you try and be clever on the internet best, everyone does it, but come the *** on, for ONCE admit Dems didn't exactly hit this crisis with feet on the ground running with the best response themselves. I don't care if Obama was still president, or hell, Carter...I still would not blame one man for a global epidemic hitting a country of over 330 million, who just love to travel abroad and drag viruses state side, when the home country of origin hid it's existence/exposure for months from the world.

Vox. That source would literally release doctored photos of Trump actually being Red Skull and argue it wasn't fake.

Those have to be some of the most ridiculous and non-scientific reasons that a airborne pathogen wasn't spreading "that bad" I've read yet. Unless you were being facetious and I just didn't catch the humor, which is possible in text.

I didn't forget it because Schumer didn't say it, it was a fake allegation Trump made against Schumer. You are also completely misrepresenting Pelosi's ad for Chinatown, it was just a video she shot to help business. It had nothing to do with Trump or covid. I realize you guys are constantly trying to revise history to cover for Trump's inaction in February, so its ok.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-media-change-tune-trump-attacks-coronavirus-china-travel-ban

So you want to see Pelosi's actions as one thing, many others don't see it that way. Regardless, she encouraged people to gather at the start of an epidemic. Do you think she did so because she wanted to people to get infected? Probably not, but you someone think Trump is evil for not doing exactly the right thing from Day 1, not even acknowledging the fact that China hiding it's very existence for months was the main ingredient to our current situation,.

You prefer the narrative driven by your media sources, as does anyone. But since they all are unable to be trusted at this point and only over their side of things, I'm forced to post a link to the only news source that has conservative bias and doesn't ignore publishing such things. Which, I hate.

But if you actually think that there were no Democrats bashing on Trump's January travel ban, you're more than misinformed, you simply chose to ignore it, which I guess people on both sides do.

Blaming Covid on Trump is simply ridiculous when you can't even bring yourself to blame the protesters for most probably at bare minimum multiplying the effect of Round 2.

U.S. coronavirus cases surge by more than 45,000 in one day, total surpasses 2.5 million

That's playing with definitions, the key word there is "at the time" which isn't what an asymptomatic infection is. The news is taking the definition of one thing and seeming to make it apply to another because they share a word.

Asymptomatic infection is when someone is exposed to an infection (viral or bacterial) and their immune system contains and removes the pathogen before the onset of symptoms. Basically the person was never contagious in the first place as the virus never progressed to that stage. The vast majority of infections are going to be asymptomatic in healthy people. Someone was exposed, an infection happened, there are antibodies present, the person was never contagious and never expressed symptoms because their body defeated the contagious before the contagion spread enough to actually generate symptoms.

Most of the symptoms we associate with viral infections aren't actually caused by the virus, instead they are caused by the bodies response to that virus. Increase temperature, headaches, nausea, sneezing, coughing, chest congestion, all that stuff is a side effect of the war being waged between our bodies various immune system cells and the virus's infected cells. What we call "flu like symptoms" is just collateral damage between the invader and the defender.

No symptoms = no apparent collateral damage = infection was defeated before it spread = wasn't contagious yet.

That it what an asymptomatic infection is. It's an infection that goes from start to finish without any symptoms.

Now what you guys are talking about is the long *** incubation period (approx two weeks) of this virus, which is what it makes it so damn infectious. Most virus's have an incubation period of a few days, meaning the host knows rather fast if their body has already defeated the virus (no symptoms) or has failed to detect it and the virus has spread sufficiently to be contagious (symptoms). Eventually the body does detect it, but by then the viral load is large enough that the host will most certainly feel the collateral damage of that war.

A person who was infected, was still in the incubation period, and later came down with symptoms is by definition not an asymptotic infection. That's just a host who's still in the incubation period.

These are very different things and for the love of all that is holy ignore what you hear on TV. Every news network is blasting fear nonstop 24/7 because it sells. Media networks aren't in the News business, they are in the Ad Sales business and the viewers are the product not the customer.

Masks help in two ways. First they reduce the probability of an infected person spreading the infection via microscopic water droplets, aka coughing / ect. Second they protect the wearer by reducing the sensitive surface area exposed to someone else's microscopic droplets.

Count to what the fear peddlers are saying it's extremely difficult for an invader to get through the human epidermis. Our skin is crawling with helpful bacteria, along with being thick enough that hostile viral / bacterial agents can't penetrate it. We're really only vulnerable in places where our skin is thinner or sensitive tissue is exposed. That is usually the eyes, nostrils, mouth and inner ears, along with any cuts that aren't covered. By placing a physical barrier over that part of the face it's limiting the area that an invader can attach itself to.

That being said, no amount of masks or social distancing in the world will prevent infection if people don't wash their hands and avoid touching their face.

It's going to be difficult to convey the nuance here, but I'm going to make the argument that in a sane world Vox would actually be moderate.

Vox' users skew even more heavily liberal than the site's authors because the explicitly partisan right wing media has done a good job hardening its consumers against other sources of information. This, combined with the ad-based business model, means it isn't profitable for Vox to post articles that won't get clicks from liberal audiences.

However, all studies on the topic that I know of (and there have been many in the last few years) show that liberal audiences tend to be more open to receiving facts and information, even if it disagrees with them. Vox reports on facts. When they take a position, it tends to be some shade of liberal (or interesting to liberals) because that is their business model. There is also no point in discussing truly conservative policy except in contrast to a liberal alternative, but that is a separate matter.

This is unlike a site that is partisan first and business model second, like OANN, which would use an out of context image as the central thrust of an article because the political narrative is actually what drives the site. Consuming news from outlets like this is just a way of asserting a partisan identity and staying on top of the new propaganda terms.


When I read some liberal news media (here's looking at you, Mother Jones/Slate), they're frequently not factually inaccurate but they're almost as disconnected from reality as liberterians. There are definitely some liberal trash sites analogous to Breitbart in intent if not reach (I honestly don't know any off the top of my head but if it says Green in the title it's probably garbage.)

CNN and the like are actually conservative in practice, though. They follow the conservative local news "if it bleeds it leads" mantra pretty much to a T. By emphasizing all the scary things going on in the world, they give them an outsized importance in our collective memory. There's an argument to be made, for instance, that CNN/Fox basically caused our disproportionate response to 9/11. We're losing multiple 9/11s of people every week to our own incompetence in fighting a single virus and because it's not an acute wound that camera crews can post cameras at, it's getting much less mobilization. There are plenty of other examples of slower, more systemic things wrong with society (like racism) that CNN didn't cover until it became an acute problem because "the way things are" isn't "if it bleeds it leads"-style news.

Vox is accurate and gives caveats to indicate confidence in factual statements. It's definitely imperfect and written by humans, but in any sane world Vox would be a moderate news outlet/metaanalysis site.

I'm well aware of what went down, which is why I specifically said that Schumer did not call Trump racist, nor did Pelosi. That was your original claim. Trump earned that criticism, as he only instituted a partial ban..then proceeded to do nothing for over a month. The entire month of February was not only wasted, but his behavior made things worse.

All attempts at discussion fails right there.

Vox is one of the worst offenders out there, it's right next to Slate / Mother Jones / TYT and WaPo. It appeals solely to young twenty-something / thirty-something millennials who think the world owes them a certain lifestyle, and they could have it if only they could defeat those evil Republicans. It say's whatever those twenty-somethings will agree with, and right now that's "Trump is worse then Hitler". "Trump is a homophobe" and "Islam is awesome".

Yeah, I'm sorry, but Vox is pretty bad. And even if you want to consider them "fact-based reporting" (which is a stretch), that completely ignores the notion that facts are the best vehicles for presenting lies.

For example, what if I told you that there is a chemical out there that is both directly and indirectly responsible for millions of deaths worldwide every year? Among its many purposes, it's used as an industrial solvent and coolant, is a key component of pesticide production and distribution, and it's used to treat sewer waste. But despite all that, guess what? The CDC refuses to label it as a toxic substance. Even though its potentially lethal nature and its propensity for carrying diseases is well-documented, you'll even find the stuff in children's juice boxes.

What is this chemical I speak of?

And that's how news agencies handle "facts" nowadays.

Useless examples are always useless.

Useless examples are always useless.

And yet here you are.

Man you gotta use it's chemical name, Dihydrogen Monoxide. Sounds even scarier when you call it that.

Coronavirus cases worldwide top 10 million with nearly half a million deaths — and 25% are in the US
CNBC

We're number one!

Thanks Trump. Couldn't have done it without you!

Don't underestimate us Americans. We could've done it with anybody in charge.