bias and conspiracy theory? how do you get that from daily posting of new cases, number of tests, daily deaths, even when i compare one day to previous days in previous weeks, when i compare several weeks, show me where i have a bias or am backing a conspiracy theory, i dare you to prove it.
like I said, I could see a bad number coming. Some of the larger states had clearly underreported over the weekend, and we are still on an upward mortality trend. The cases didn’t jump by too much though, which is good.
Well, this thread, while far from over, will be retired when it is done, to the GC Hall of Fame for the longest thread in Too Hot history. @tilly, you getting worried yet?
Nah...It has taken 5 months to do what The Thread did in 6 weeks, and it will likey take 2 or 3 more months. . It may get there on number of posts, but not views. It is like the NBA player who plays for 20 years and amasses stats compared to the Hall of Fame legend that hangs it up after 13 seasons. I also think this was a consolidated thread early on. Does that disqualify it?
Ever feel that science is sometimes just too far behind common sense? Are we just now realizing that airborne covid is infectious? Really? Like the mask decision; I mean people wore masks in 1918 for the flu but it took several months for "science" to realize that masks would be helpful against spread of covid?? Scientists report that airborne coronavirus is probably infectious Scientists have known for several months the new coronavirus can become suspended in microdroplets expelled by patients when they speak and breathe, but until now there was no proof that these tiny particles are infectious. A new study by scientists at the University of Nebraska that was uploaded to a medical preprint site this week has shown for the first time that SARS-CoV-2 taken from microdroplets, defined as under five microns, can replicate in lab conditions. This boosts the hypothesis that normal speaking and breathing, not just coughing and sneezing, are responsible for spreading COVID-19 -- and that infectious doses of the virus can travel distances far greater than the six feet (two meters) urged by social distancing guidelines. The results are still considered preliminary and have not yet appeared in a peer-reviewed journal, which would lend more credibility to the methods devised by the scientists.
As you point out, there are a few ways to arrive at the number at this point, and they’re all imperfect. Confirmed deaths per total population is going to be too low, and confirmed deaths per recovery is going to be too high. Later on the math will definitely change as the retrospective methods of calculation are used. Those numbers still won’t be perfect, but they will make any of the current stats moot. As for what’s the best of the imperfect methods right now, I think it was @G8trGr8t that just posted a recent scientific estimate. I didn’t check their methods, but it would seem be a good place to check.
Your article said they have "known for months" , but this was the first time they actually replicated and measured it happening in a lab, by getting those particles to reproduce virus, i.e. proving the hypothesis. Those are two different things. Assuming, and proving. Basically, they had a hypothesis (the assumption), this was them running an experiment which proved the hypothesis. One naturally comes some time after the other, no? Is this unreasonable? Not all respiratory viruses are the same, just being a respiratory virus doesn't make them all the same. Though "wearing a mask" should probably be common sense for all of them. By showing which particles can reproduce, they can get more specific about what is necessary to filter this particular virus.
Updated stats from world o meter as of 8 am EDT. There were 16 states with a decrease in active cases and again lead by NY and NJ. There were 9 states with 1-2 deaths and only 7 states with 0 deaths.
It wasn't exactly consolidated. It was split into Global, US and Florida. Where are we if we add those three together? Eat your heart out Chip.
