Just a flu bro...literally

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Daxtrader, Apr 18, 2020.

  1. Bugenhagen

    Bugenhagen

    Great, so you as a retail level dev guy, on your lonesome are looking at these lads and still can't explain what that ranking actually is?

    Jesús wept. Jog on sunshine.

    You have a lot to learn about human intelligence and its strengths and weaknesses.
     
    #111     Apr 21, 2020
  2. WeToddDid2

    WeToddDid2

    Here is an article you may be able to find some historical return info:

    https://www.toledoblade.com/busines...bots-aqr-boss-wall-street/stories/20191013143

    The master of robots left AQR. Now he's coming for Wall Street
     
    #112     Apr 21, 2020
  3. Bugenhagen

    Bugenhagen

    Now excuse me, I need to catch up on some threads.
     
    #113     Apr 21, 2020
  4. jem

    jem

    I just read the paper....

    1. I think the abstract is correct...
    2. (His conclusions are virtually identically to what some of us have been saying here for weeks.)
    The data sucked
    we have to consider the costs of the lockdown
    it may have been ok to briefly shutdown while collecting data
    we should be customizing the response to different areas.

    3. If you review his tables - Low Risk groups need to get back to work right now because we really will not be saving a significant amount of lives.... per his models....

    4. --- note... his data suffers from the same issues that all the data we have seen suffers....
    we really don't know how many people have been exposed... The more people we see who have antibodies the sooner the low risk groups should have returned to work.

    "
    Main Conclusions (1/2)

    • Governments need protocols for “nowcasting” the mortality and transmissibility of the pandemic

    For example, a random sample of 1,000 individuals would have quickly dispelled WHO’s assertion
    that COVID 19 had a fatality rate of 3.4%
    • Government statistics show that lockdowns have been successful at

    slowing down the spread of COVID 19

    reducing the number of deaths directly caused by this disease
    However, government statistics do not account for the loss of lives and livelihoods
    derived from universal lockdowns

    The objective of lockdowns should be to minimize the total loss of life, not only deaths directly
    caused by the pandemic

    In particular, large scale unemployment is a leading cause of drug abuse. Over the next months and
    years, we will likely observe a spike in drug abuse related deaths , crime, and mental health issues



    Main Conclusions (2/2)
    • The K SEIR model shows that targeted lockdowns (on high risk populations) are
    more likely to achieve the triple goal of

    minimizing loss of lives

    minimizing loss of livelihood

    avoiding a depletion of medical resources
    • A brief universal lockdown is warranted while we collect data regarding
    mortality and transmissibility, followed by targeted lockdowns of the high risk
    population

    Low risk population should continue to practice sensible personal protection measures

    Governments must learn from the mistakes of COVID 19’s crisis management,
    and design targeted lockdowns in anticipation of COVID 20

    There is not one size that fits all, and national governments must device tailored targeted
    lockdowns based on their particular circumstances
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2020
    #114     Apr 21, 2020
    WeToddDid2 likes this.
  5. gwb-trading

    gwb-trading

    So what do you have to say about slides 25 to 30 and 31 to 34 showing that Strategy 2c with a Lockdown for 60 days is the best strategy and is adopted as the baseline strategy.

    It should be noted that Prado states that it is 60 days from when the first case is reported. Waiting days/weeks after the first reported case to lockdown extends the required lockdown time.

    =========from earlier =========

    So basically what Lipton and Prado are stating in this paper is that a 60 day quarantine at home works best as the solution. This is supported by slides 25 through 30 (Strategies for Lifting Lockdowns) which uses the Strategy 2c (60 day lockdown) as the base case. Slides 31 to 34 show the effectiveness of alternatives.

    The Main Conclusions on slides 38 and 39 support the earlier information for a 60 day lockdown while bringing up concerns over the unemployment leading to drug related deaths, crime, and mental health issues.

    Most states in the U.S. have not even been locked down for 30 days yet. The Prado paper indicates that 60 days should be used before easing the lockdown for the best results.


    So basically most states in the U.S. should wait at least another 30 days before considering opening for business according to the Prado paper.

    This is very much in-line with what I have been presenting and what most health professionals are stating in terms of timeline. With the understanding that proper testing and contact tracing must be in place before a state can "open up" for business with a phased re-opening.

    This also shows why the situation in Georgia is about to go horribly wrong due to their governor.
     
    #115     Apr 21, 2020
  6. jem

    jem

    he best strategy is most likely to let the low risk group out at 30 days or earlier... because relatively few deaths are saved by the sixty day scenario and you have no idea how many thousands of lives will be saved by not being shutdown.

    hence his conclusion.... is broken out for high risk vs low risk groups...



    "The K SEIR model shows that targeted lockdowns (on high risk populations) are
    more likely to achieve the triple goal of

    minimizing loss of lives

    minimizing loss of livelihood

    avoiding a depletion of medical resources

    A brief universal lockdown is warranted while we collect data regarding
    mortality and transmissibility, followed by targeted lockdowns of the high risk
    population

    Low risk population should continue to practice sensible personal protection measures

    Governments must learn from the mistakes of COVID 19’s crisis management,
    and design targeted lockdowns in anticipation of COVID 20

    There is not one size that fits all, and national governments must devi(s)e tailored targeted
    lockdowns based on their particular circumstances




     
    #116     Apr 21, 2020
    WeToddDid2 likes this.
  7. gwb-trading

    gwb-trading

    Good points
     
    #117     Apr 21, 2020
  8. Daxtrader

    Daxtrader

    What is the point of you posting this article regarding death rates, whether we should shut down the country, etc ? Stop embarrassing yourself and post somewhere else fucking idiot.
     
    #118     Apr 22, 2020
  9. Hotcakes

    Hotcakes

    Fake News.

    Burn down the American Way of Life. Freedom of Travel. Freedom of Employment. Freedom of Movement. Recreation. Burn it all down. We should all board up our homes, doors and windows. Let the entire nation go bankrupt. We can just print money indefinitely and let the medical "officials" at the World Health Organization (some Ethiopian with no medical degree), rule over America. That's the way the Constitution was written. So let it be done.
     
    #119     Apr 22, 2020
  10. newwurldmn

    newwurldmn

    Typical conservative talking points with no thought or understanding behind your words.

    What freedom of employment and travel has been denied? I'm planning flying to Chicago in the middle of May for a fancy dinner. Will the federal government (those departments run by President Trump) prevent me from doing so? Should I bring my friend's AR-15 to the airport to defend my Freedom of Travel and Recreation?

    With respect to the leader of the WHO? Do you have a problem with his being Ethiopian or of his medical degree? Because he has a PhD in medical research.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tedros_Adhanom

    Was Mike Pence (a science denying "evangelical" christian with no medical degree) be more qualified to run the US response? He's not from Ethiopia.
     
    #120     Apr 22, 2020
    Bugenhagen likes this.