Jump to content
gleninjersey

Prep For Quarantine / Pandemic

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, JHZR2 said:

Lots of good points here. 
 

The interesting one is debts.  I didn’t live through the 70s, and wasn’t a major purchaser in the 80s, but I do remember vaguely as a child when mortgages were 15%+. 
 

If prices for goods increase with inflation, and you can buy something for $1 today that will cost $2 next year as they inflate money to pay for stimulus, it seems almost worth it to incur the debt, because you can buy an item with intrinsic value of something, and pay it off with cheaper dollars in the future. 
 

im not buying real estate, and am not sure that holds because RE may drop with the recession that is looming.  
 

But if we are expecting inflation, and can leverage no/low interest credit, I kind of have to wonder if the premise on debt is correct. Or is there a game that one could play to make out on durable items (since this is a firearms forum, let’s use firearms as an example) that results in a net benefit.  I’m generally a Dave Ramsey guy, so down on debt, big on investment.  But cash savings will be decimated if inflation runs rampant... and while now and the future may be a stock buying opportunity, timing it is tough.  So, maybe the answer is to buy needed/desired durable goods?

we already started planting for the year - do need to get more peppers and tomatoes...

I was born in the 60s, I remember the 70s.  My dad had a pretty good job, but we were still hand to mouth.  The only nice thing was a saving account that paid 8%.   I put in my $5 every month and at the end of the year I had like $65.  It was magic.    Mortgages must have been a pain as I know my dad must have re-fi'd half a dozen times as rates fell in the 80s.  Of course, he'd suck out every penny of equity they'd give him.  He bought that house in Atwater Ohio in 1972, 40 acres, farm house, 2 big barns, 3 out buildings for 42k I believe.    I believe he still owed the full amount when he died in 2005.    His wife(not my mother) sold the house and the remaining 2 acres for 200k in 2017.   They kept selling off bits every few years. 

I expect inflation for a little while as these stimulus bills flood liquidity everywhere, but I expect a HUGE crash at some point.    This will mean a deflationary period where the dollar appreciates in value and in effect doubles or triples your notional interest rate.   Defaults will become normal and the 2008 crash will look like happy days.  If it takes you, in effect, 3 dollars to pay back 1 dollar, you'll just shrug and walk away.  This is why you want to be debt free.   Keep paying it off with ever-inflating funny money, but when the music stops, you want a chair to sit in(having it paid off).   The easiest way to play that game is to not play that game and eliminate the risk long before the inflation bubble pops.

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mrs. Peel said:

And, although the malaria drugs have a decent safety profile - they're not without some risks. In some of these early COVID-19 trials, there were some patients that died of sudden cardiac arrest. It seems that the malaria drugs can do that for some patients with a certain congenital condition that impacts a part of their heartbeat - called a "long QT"  (a delayed time for the heart to recharge after its beat)....... Although early anecdotal reports look promising for some patients, there may be COVID-19 patients who are not good candidates because their risk of sudden cardiac arrest is even greater than their risk of severe respiratory issues!

It all comes down to how sick you are from Covid-19.

If you are having minor symptoms, ride it out.  Why would you even be in a hospital?  Draining needed resources for those who are much sicker and much more in need of medical attention.

On the other hand, if you are in very bad shape, already in the hospital and your odds of not pulling through in the next 24-48 hours are high then I don't think you or the doctors should be worrying about possible negative side effects.  Because in a few short hours you won't be around.

Should they do more controlled test to make sure it's usefull and the side effects don't outweight the benefits for those who have minor or less serious symptoms to keep the illness from escalating.  Absolutely.   

But anyone who's condition is critical should be allowed to have the drug.  Now.  

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, gleninjersey said:

It all comes down to how sick you are from Covid-19.

If you are having minor symptoms, ride it out.  Why would you even be in a hospital?  Draining needed resources for those who are much sicker and much more in need of medical attention.

On the other hand, if you are in very bad shape, already in the hospital and your odds of not pulling through in the next 24-48 hours are high then I don't think you or the doctors should be worrying about possible negative side effects.  Because in a few short hours you won't be around.

Should they do more controlled test to make sure it's usefull and the side effects don't outweight the benefits for those who have minor or less serious symptoms to keep the illness from escalating.  Absolutely.   

But anyone who's condition is critical should be allowed to have the drug.  Now.  

 

I saw a stat that around 50% fatality rate for CoViD19 patients that go on ventilators.  It seems an acceptable risk at that point.  But I'm not sure how early you need to administer the Hydrocloroquine to be effective.

But hasn't this been used for malaria for years? If it is acceptable risk for malaria, why not CoViD19 when it is serious or critical? With informed consent.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, leahcim said:

I saw a stat that around 50% fatality rate for CoViD19 patients that go on ventilators.  It seems an acceptable risk at that point.  But I'm not sure how early you need to administer the Hydrocloroquine to be effective.

But hasn't this been used for malaria for years? If it is acceptable risk for malaria, why not CoViD19 when it is serious or critical? With informed consent.

My best friend was working the ICU and basically said the last thing you want is to be is there and on a respirator. Obviously you don't have much of a choice if your about to die, but he did say it should be an absolute last resort because the rate of recovery was actually lower than that at about 40%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Spawne32 said:

The news was is saying that about 12 people an hour are dying from COVID in NYC alone. That's pretty damn insane if you ask me.

While this is very sad, scary, troublesome and however, NOT unprecedented....

How about this stat from 2012....so when this hits peaks and winds down...THOSE numbers arw still valid....THAT is scary .

 

Sudden Cardiac Arrest (SCA) is a leading cause of death in the United States, claiming an estimated 325,000 lives each year. SCA kills 1,000 people a day or one person every two minutes. It is estimated that 95 percent of victims of cardiac arrest die before they reach a hospital or other source of emergency help

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, USRifle30Cal said:

While this is very sad, scary, troublesome and however, NOT unprecedented....

How about this stat from 2012....so when this hits peaks and winds down...THOSE numbers arw still valid....THAT is scary .

 

Sudden Cardiac Arrest (SCA) is a leading cause of death in the United States, claiming an estimated 325,000 lives each year. SCA kills 1,000 people a day or one person every two minutes. It is estimated that 95 percent of victims of cardiac arrest die before they reach a hospital or other source of emergency help

I was just looking for stats for heart disease in NYC.  Could only find the number for entire state, and that's about 5 deaths per hour.

However, that number is averaged over one year.  Any one day could be much worse, or much better.  The Covid-19 death rate will rise and fall- hopefully close to peak now.  With the non pharmaceutical interventions going on, that death rate should start to fall in a week or two ( there is a lag between taking measures to slow the spread and when you actually see changes in new infections, then changes in deaths).

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked my cousin who works in hospital administration to find out if they are tracking deaths by distinguishing between the following:

     Died with the corona virus.

     Died because of the corona virus.

If I get an answer I'll post it up.

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know of 6 people that have had covid...mild to moderate symptoms...  not tested....how do i know....they ALL to a one have lost sense of smell and taste

Which it appears is a symptom of it.....

Now being they are not tested ...they are not counted...how many aren't counted?

One today called a 24/7 telehealth line, nurse said oh its just allergies...hydrate take tylenol and zyrtec with rest....

Do they know what to look for and ask about?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, 45Doll said:

I asked my cousin who works in hospital administration to find out if they are tracking deaths by distinguishing between the following:

     Died with the corona virus.

     Died because of the corona virus.

If I get an answer I'll post it up.

I’ve said this several times...be careful of the ‘statistics’ that are being circulated in the MSM...they can be quite misleading in that regard. 
People who die as a ‘test positive’ for COV-19 are being, in MANY instances, counted as COV-19 deaths. That’s simply NOT accurate.
Beware of raw data, as it doesn’t paint the correct picture. 
 

I posted this before in the 1A lounge, but this blog is worth reading and following. It’s updated daily, sometimes several times a day. It will give you insight into that very thing..as well as other interesting COV19 info. 
 

https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/

  • Agree 2
  • Informative 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, USRifle30Cal said:

I know of 6 people that have had covid...mild to moderate symptoms...  not tested....how do i know....they ALL to a one have lost sense of smell and taste

Which it appears is a symptom of it.....

Now being they are not tested ...they are not counted...how many aren't counted?

One today called a 24/7 telehealth line, nurse said oh its just allergies...hydrate take tylenol and zyrtec with rest....

Do they know what to look for and ask about?

That's it.....my son also lost taste....and wasn't tested either.....you can probably triple the number they put out....my son had a Doctor who told him immediately your a + and he was right on including what he prescribed......a nurse is not a doctor....omo.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

My best friend was working the ICU and basically said the last thing you want is to be is there and on a respirator. Obviously you don't have much of a choice if your about to die, but he did say it should be an absolute last resort because the rate of recovery was actually lower than that at about 40%.

That metric is like so many others that are likely out of context.  If you’re in bad enough condition to need to be considered to go on a ventilator, the chances of making it are low to begin with.  I can think of two in my memory that justify the 50-ish percent rate.  My grandfather had CHF, was on one, and came out of it to recover and live a few more years.  My good friend’s father had a heart attack, open heart surgery, was on one and didn’t recover.  But both were candidates for a ventilator because they had severe underlying conditions.  So it would be expected that the outcomes are a crapshoot regardless....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Displaced Texan said:

I’ve said this several times...be careful of the ‘statistics’ that are being circulated in the MSM...they can be quite misleading in that regard. 
People who die as a ‘test positive’ for COV-19 are being, in MANY instances, counted as COV-19 deaths. That’s simply NOT accurate.
Beware of raw data, as it doesn’t paint the correct picture. 
 

I posted this before in the 1A lounge, but this blog is worth reading and following. It’s updated daily, sometimes several times a day. It will give you insight into that very thing..as well as other interesting COV19 info. 
 

https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/

About 3000 people die every day in the US, likely while is a hospital, from the various co-morbidities associated with high risk COVID19 sufferers. So one question that should be asked is what are these numbers now.  Is it still averaging at 3000 while we count covid deaths, or has it dropped inexplicably while covid deaths are counted?  Are covid deaths....died with covid... or actual excess deaths as typically counted in flu stats?
 

 

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JHZR2 said:

That metric is like so many others that are likely out of context.  If you’re in bad enough condition to need to be considered to go on a ventilator, the chances of making it are low to begin with.  I can think of two in my memory that justify the 50-ish percent rate.  My grandfather had CHF, was on one, and came out of it to recover and live a few more years.  My good friend’s father had a heart attack, open heart surgery, was on one and didn’t recover.  But both were candidates for a ventilator because they had severe underlying conditions.  So it would be expected that the outcomes are a crapshoot regardless....

Context? 

A doctor working in the ICU contracts covid 19, can barely breath, chest paint.. has an SpO2 of 83... 

Refuses to go to hospital...

Luckily he has gotten better the last few days on zpak

Most people on the ground are recognizing that ventilators aren't really helping people up to this point.

In fact some hospitals are showing 90% rate of failure. 

People with medical experience, and he's not the first one, are weighing if the additional risks with ventilators outweigh the benefits. 

Its actually at a point where they've started conversations about if its even worth using them due to the prolonged use of hospital resources. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Spawne32 said:

The news was is saying that about 12 people an hour are dying from COVID in NYC alone. That's pretty damn insane if you ask me.

That's approaching the Chicago shooting rate.

 

14 hours ago, USRifle30Cal said:

I know of 6 people that have had covid...mild to moderate symptoms...  not tested....how do i know....they ALL to a one have lost sense of smell and taste

That's the best time to try out Zeke's crockpot pineapple ribs. 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Handyman said:

That's approaching the Chicago shooting rate.

 

 

There have 498 people shot in Chicago, year to date.

We are on day 95.   This means there have been 1140 hours so far this year.

498/1140 = .437 shot / hour

12 = .437 * X    

X = 27.45 times the "shot" rate of Chicago.

98 people have been KILLED in Chicago this year.

98/1140 = .086 killed / hour

12 = .086 * X

X = 139.53 times more likely to die of Covid-19 than to be shot and killed in Chicago.   If you are a young black male.

If you are anyone else, you can bump that multiplier by a 1.33 orders of magnitude.   If you are not a young black male(roughly 3 % of the population), you are 4,651 times more likely to die of Covid19 than being shot and killed in Chicago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Kevin125 said:

About 3000 people die every day in the US, likely while is a hospital, from the various co-morbidities associated with high risk COVID19 sufferers. So one question that should be asked is what are these numbers now.  Is it still averaging at 3000 while we count covid deaths, or has it dropped inexplicably while covid deaths are counted?  Are covid deaths....died with covid... or actual excess deaths as typically counted in flu stats?
 

 

Only working on my first cup of coffee...bear with me...

Data is an interesting thing, and it also can be a rabbit hole. We have to be careful of ALL the data, how it’s collected, measured, and how it’s normalized. I think the MSM as a whole does a poor job of doing that. 

I’m not picking on you, Kevin, but I don’t know if that 3000 people/day average death rate is accurate (I haven’t Looked at the numbers), but let’s assume it is.
In examining the death rate data, we have to take in account  that there are also many other factors to consider. You have to dig into the right data in the right WAY to be able to tell the whole story. 
 

For example...

How many people (upon average) would have died each day in traffic (MVA) fatalities? Since we are under ‘quarantine’, we (presumably) have less traffic on the roads. This translates to less accidents, which means less MVA deaths. How does this change the 3000 deaths/day stat? Does this reduction in traffic, and traffic related deaths correlate with the NORMAL rate of MVA related deaths per day? 
Additionally, now many people would have normally died in work related accidents (WRA)  that are NOT dying in these type of accidents because of the lockdown?  
How many people WOULD have died due to a bee sting that are not now...because not as many people are working in their yards? By the same token, how many wives were killed by their husbands (or vice versa!) from being quarantined together for too long?!  Silly example, I know..but it illustrates the point. 

I’m quite sure we are going to see interesting stats on death rates overall as a result of this. How we dig down into it if extremely important. 
 

HOW the data is counted is equally, if not MORE important than the data itself. Remember the 1994 Clinton Crime bill (that gave us the AWB), and how ‘they’ told us it ‘reduced’ crime? When we dug  into the data further, it was determined that the AWB had negligible effects on the crime stats...that new/innovative policing strategies and techniques had the most drastic effect on crime reduction, as did economics. Correlating the AWB to the reduction in crime was simply NOT the true picture. 

Accurately differentiating between actual deaths caused BY COV-19, and deaths of people WITH COV-19 is extremely important. Of those who die OF it, factors have to be normalized for other data (health risk, age, etc). Same as seasonal flu...people dying OF it have other factors to consider. Example...If 72 year old John Smith DIDNT have COPD, and heart disease, would be have died of the flu? Would the flu be any more/less deadly? What about Sally Adams? Sally is a 24 year old female with no known major health risk factors, why did she die of the flu? 

MANY factors have to be normalized for/taken into account in the statistical equation for COV-19 deaths. 
Among them: age, race, economic status, education (yes, even that), underlying health factors (by category)....many, many things...before an accurate model can be determined. It takes a lot of data and time to sort through the data before we are able to see the true picture. 

Yes, I realize I’m making very general statements (as opposed to using real data examples), but I’m trying to keep it simple in order to illustrate the point...(and it is worth saying AGAIN) be careful with data, how you collect it, count it, measure it, and weigh it against statistical norms. 

In the mean time, (yes, people are dying, I know that’s important..and scary for some), we have to wait for the true picture. True statistics considerably lag data....so while we wait, be safe, careful, keep your head about you, and don’t panic over all this. 

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Malsua said:

There have 498 people shot in Chicago, year to date.

We are on day 95.   This means there have been 1140 hours so far this year.

498/1140 = .437 shot / hour

12 = .437 * X    

X = 27.45 times the "shot" rate of Chicago.

98 people have been KILLED in Chicago this year.

98/1140 = .086 killed / hour

12 = .086 * X

X = 139.53 times more likely to die of Covid-19 than to be shot and killed in Chicago.   If you are a young black male.

If you are anyone else, you can bump that multiplier by a 1.33 orders of magnitude.   If you are not a young black male(roughly 3 % of the population), you are 4,651 times more likely to die of Covid19 than being shot and killed in Chicago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not to be a dick....Your data is wrong, I’m afraid, because your math is incorrect. 
 

Day 95....95 days x 24 hours in a day = 2280 hours NOT 1140. You seem to have used 12 hours in a day. You are probably also working on your first cup of coffee! 
 

Even my initial look was wrong...you know...first cup of coffee and all. 
Calender year...say April 1 2019 to April 1 2020 (using your number of 498 deaths per calender year gunshot deaths in Chicago) means:

24x365 = 8760 hours. 
498/8760= 0.0568 deaths per hour. 
 

98/2280 = 0.043 shot per hour so far this year. 
 

By your numbers (corrected for the proper number hours per day), the gunshot rate death in Chicago has fallen  so far this year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Displaced Texan said:

Only working on my first cup of coffee...bear with me...

Data is an interesting thing, and it also can be a rabbit hole. We have to be careful of ALL the data, how it’s collected, measured, and how it’s normalized. I think the MSM as a whole does a poor job of doing that. 

I’m not picking on you, Kevin, but I don’t know if that 3000 people/day average death rate is accurate (I haven’t Looked at the numbers), but let’s assume it is.
In examining the death rate data, we have to take in account  that there are also many other factors to consider. You have to dig into the right data in the right WAY to be able to tell the whole story. 
 

For example...

How many people (upon average) would have died each day in traffic (MVA) fatalities? Since we are under ‘quarantine’, we (presumably) have less traffic on the roads. This translates to less accidents, which means less MVA deaths. How does this change the 3000 deaths/day stat? Does this reduction in traffic, and traffic related deaths correlate with the NORMAL rate of MVA related deaths per day? 
Additionally, now many people would have normally died in work related accidents (WRA)  that are NOT dying in these type of accidents because of the lockdown?  
How many people WOULD have died due to a bee sting that are not now...because not as many people are working in their yards? By the same token, how many wives were killed by their husbands (or vice versa!) from being quarantined together for too long?!  Silly example, I know..but it illustrates the point. 

I’m quite sure we are going to see interesting stats on death rates overall as a result of this. How we dig down into it if extremely important. 
 

HOW the data is counted is equally, if not MORE important than the data itself. Remember the 1994 Clinton Crime bill (that gave us the AWB), and how ‘they’ told us it ‘reduced’ crime? When we dug  into the data further, it was determined that the AWB had negligible effects on the crime stats...that new/innovative policing strategies and techniques had the most drastic effect on crime reduction, as did economics. Correlating the AWB to the reduction in crime was simply NOT the true picture. 

Accurately differentiating between actual deaths caused BY COV-19, and deaths of people WITH COV-19 is extremely important. Of those who die OF it, factors have to be normalized for other data (health risk, age, etc). Same as seasonal flu...people dying OF it have other factors to consider. Example...If 72 year old John Smith DIDNT have COPD, and heart disease, would be have died of the flu? Would the flu be any more/less deadly? What about Sally Adams? Sally is a 24 year old female with no known major health risk factors, why did she die of the flu? 

MANY factors have to be normalized for/taken into account in the statistical equation for COV-19 deaths. 
Among them: age, race, economic status, education (yes, even that), underlying health factors (by category)....many, many things...before an accurate model can be determined. It takes a lot of data and time to sort through the data before we are able to see the true picture. 

Yes, I realize I’m making very general statements (as opposed to using real data examples), but I’m trying to keep it simple in order to illustrate the point...(and it is worth saying AGAIN) be careful with data, how you collect it, count it, measure it, and weigh it against statistical norms. 

In the mean time, (yes, people are dying, I know that’s important..and scary for some), we have to wait for the true picture. True statistics considerably lag data....so while we wait, be safe, careful, keep your head about you, and don’t panic over all this. 

Any accounting teacher once told me between his jameson filled coffee in class...

 

"Son, figures never lie, bit liars always figure...."

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, USRifle30Cal said:

Any accounting teacher once told me between his jameson filled coffee in class...

 

"Son, figures never lie, bit liars always figure...."

 

 

He wasn’t wrong!! Data is very very cool...but it can be manipulated by bias, incorrect analysis, bad math.....many many reasons and factors!  
 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

Context? 

A doctor working in the ICU contracts covid 19, can barely breath, chest paint.. has an SpO2 of 83... 

Refuses to go to hospital...

Luckily he has gotten better the last few days on zpak

Most people on the ground are recognizing that ventilators aren't really helping people up to this point.

In fact some hospitals are showing 90% rate of failure. 

People with medical experience, and he's not the first one, are weighing if the additional risks with ventilators outweigh the benefits. 

Its actually at a point where they've started conversations about if its even worth using them due to the prolonged use of hospital resources. 

One post on here gives statistics with backing. For example, in Italy, 90% of coved deaths were over 70yo, most had co-morbidities, often 3-4 associated. 
 

So wouldn’t it make the slightest inkling of sense that some assessment of risk should go into the decisions, and some basis of the facts coming from Italy, the cruise ship, etc. before putting people on a vent? Chances are, especially in a resource constrained environment, not every 40yo who has chest pain is going on a ventilator.

So then it comes back to my initial premise.  Those who get put on ventilators likely have other risks, other challenges, etc. You mentioning that one example as anecdotal evidence does not establish a best practice. Being intubated is painful, often people are restrained to prevent them from panicking and removing the tube. It’s not fun.  And those who get put on these systems generally have other things going on that make their risk for survival low to begin with. So again, stating a 40% chance, without any other basis, isn’t really a good story or best practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JHZR2 said:

One post on here gives statistics with backing. For example, in Italy, 90% of coved deaths were over 70yo, most had co-morbidities, often 3-4 associated. 
 

So wouldn’t it make the slightest inkling of sense that some assessment of risk should go into the decisions, and some basis of the facts coming from Italy, the cruise ship, etc. before putting people on a vent? Chances are, especially in a resource constrained environment, not every 40yo who has chest pain is going on a ventilator.

So then it comes back to my initial premise.  Those who get put on ventilators likely have other risks, other challenges, etc. You mentioning that one example as anecdotal evidence does not establish a best practice. Being intubated is painful, often people are restrained to prevent them from panicking and removing the tube. It’s not fun.  And those who get put on these systems generally have other things going on that make their risk for survival low to begin with. So again, stating a 40% chance, without any other basis, isn’t really a good story or best practice.

I was simply sharing an experience of an ICU doctor, and his own struggles. His 40% number is anecdotal. 

Actually numbers for people recovering are MUCHLOWER. 

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/04/02/826105278/ventilators-are-no-panacea-for-critically-ill-covid-19-patients

If you cut through the bullshit, the point is hospitals don't actually have resources to help you recover. There is no treatment for the disease..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Displaced Texan said:

Not to be a dick....Your data is wrong, I’m afraid, because your math is incorrect. 
 

Day 95....95 days x 24 hours in a day = 2280 hours NOT 1140. You seem to have used 12 hours in a day. You are probably also working on your first cup of coffee! 
 

Even my initial look was wrong...you know...first cup of coffee and all. 
Calender year...say April 1 2019 to April 1 2020 (using your number of 498 deaths per calender year gunshot deaths in Chicago) means:

24x365 = 8760 hours. 
498/8760= 0.0568 deaths per hour. 
 

98/2280 = 0.043 shot per hour so far this year. 
 

By your numbers (corrected for the proper number hours per day), the gunshot rate death in Chicago has fallen  so far this year. 

You're right.  I was doing half of it in my head and used the wrong number.

The point still stands, The virus is saving lives in Chicago, you're more likely to die of CV!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Malsua said:

You're right.  I was doing half of it in my head and used the wrong number.

The point still stands, The virus is saving lives in Chicago, you're more likely to die of CV!

In all fairness, these cities are on full lock down. At least in the late evenings into morning. The cops are basically doing stop and frisk all over again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

In all fairness, these cities are on full lock down. At least in the late evenings into morning. The cops are basically doing stop and frisk all over again. 

It will be interesting to see how the lockdown changes the murder rate in big cities.

I wouldn’t think it would be THAT significant of a change...I still see that the fine folks in the city of brotherly love are still killing one another with frequency. This judging by 6ABC news app...

RATE of change will be curious to see, and how Philadelphia police department spins the data. 

It will also be interesting to see if/how MVA deaths change statistically in terms of x deaths/thousand MVAs. I tend to think the rate will stay the same, but overall deaths will drop, simply because of less overall traffic. 
 

Statistics can be FUN! We could make this into a rather fun thought experiment! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw this one on the news, swear people have no shame anymore.

"Coronavirus scammers use fake 'pop-up' COVID-19 testing sites to steal DNA, personal information in Kentucky"

https://6abc.com/6078776/?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR3P3tpViN-AAMB3h8ryK84JbVU2oAv8cpMGvrPFFLsOWbQPJY3NTP07JiQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question: If the news and govt. are supposedly hyping these figures of deaths by COVID-19, why don’t we always have mobile morgues sitting outside the hospitals in NYC? They are not there for show are they? What are funeral homes supposedly being overwhelmed by the number of dead bodies they have to process?  Is that fake news?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The morgue has only so much space to perform autopsies, and I would imagine that MORE of the deceased are getting autopsied in the wake of COV19...instead of going directly to the funeral home. 
 

For example, my father recently passed away (cancer), he was taken directly to the funeral home. No autopsy was done...as cause of death was directly known. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...