Jump to content

Reversal Night 3/24/20

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

You know the old saying.

"Buy the rumor; sell the effing pandemic that is killing thousands and has the western economies in stand still...."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Looks like yesterday marked a relative low.  My gut is uncanny, if only I could find a way to actually trust it enough to trade.

There's a huge difference between now and 2009. The Fed started direct QE in March 2009. It worked immediately.  It started direct QE this time in late September. It worked for a while but the bubbl

Herd immunity. Is that like... when everybody is dead?

Oxford is about to piss all over Imperial College of London's tooth brush:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/oxmu2rwsnhi9j9c/Draft-COVID-19-Model (13).pdf?dl=0

PDF warning. They are basically saying Imperial College is full of hot air and that the majority of people in Italy and the UK are already infected and the case fatality rate is therefore only a small fraction of what was projected. So they should be reaching herd immunity soon. 

I have a really hard time buying this but I will let the data convince me. Luckily this is a theory that can be tested. This will be very interesting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sandy beach said:

I have no clue who he is. 

ESPN guy. Anchored SportsCenter for many years and has nationally syndicated radio show. 

He wants to kill the Lt. Governor of Texas’ grandparents or something. 
 

image.jpeg.20a3c903dabb2c57d4284e35b7691f26.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sandy beach said:

I have no clue who he is. 

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick: 'I'm all in' on risking my health to lift social distancing guidelines for economic boost

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/23/politics/coronavirus-texas-social-distancing-guidelines/index.html

He basically says "Survival of the fittest". That's social Darwinism and that's facism. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm blind on this. What we need to do is go to the ground zero hot spots in the US like NY, WA and CA and start a series of random serology tests and see just how widespread the infection is so we can see what is going on. If most people have antibodies as this is suggesting then we are closer to the finish line than anyone suspected and this is much less deadly than anyone suspected. This would be easy and cheap and we could get results in days. I just can't believe that we are making such huge policy decisions without doing this first. 

I'm still trying to wrap my head around their arguments. But their basic position about needing to do sampling of the population is spot on. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, sandy beach said:

Oxford is about to piss all over Imperial College of London's tooth brush:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/oxmu2rwsnhi9j9c/Draft-COVID-19-Model (13).pdf?dl=0

PDF warning. They are basically saying Imperial College is full of hot air and that the majority of people in Italy and the UK are already infected and the case fatality rate is therefore only a small fraction of what was projected. So they should be reaching herd immunity soon. 

I have a really hard time buying this but I will let the data convince me. Luckily this is a theory that can be tested. This will be very interesting. 

Thanks for the link. Read it.

Two quick points. First, there's some discussion of "reinfection" that would draw into question "the assumption that infection elicits protective immunity." Second, aren't they also presupposing a single strain? I don't know enough underlying science, but let's say for lack of better terminology "the Italian strain" is far more aggressive than the "Taiwan Strain" - and so, mortality is differentiated between those two countries based less on response than on exposure. That might muddy the model, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jimi said:

Thanks for the link. Read it.

Two quick points. First, there's some discussion of "reinfection" that would draw into question "the assumption that infection elicits protective immunity." Second, aren't they also presupposing a single strain? I don't know enough underlying science, but let's say for lack of better terminology "the Italian strain" is far more aggressive than the "Taiwan Strain" - and so, mortality is differentiated between those two countries based less on response than on exposure. That might muddy the model, no?

That would mean that Covid 19 has already mutated? So quickly? That would make it even harder to find the right vaccine, isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Channelingstocks dot com!

tvc_f7bff1576f60cc27efa58f4137c26cc8.png

 

That's right. Channelingstocks DOT COM! 

Channelingstocks DOT COM! 

Channelingstocks DOT COM! !!!!

Get urs taday! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, sandy beach said:

I'm blind on this. What we need to do is go to the ground zero hot spots in the US like NY, WA and CA and start a series of random serology tests and see just how widespread the infection is so we can see what is going on. If most people have antibodies as this is suggesting then we are closer to the finish line than anyone suspected and this is much less deadly than anyone suspected. This would be easy and cheap and we could get results in days. I just can't believe that we are making such huge policy decisions without doing this first. 

I'm still trying to wrap my head around their arguments. But their basic position about needing to do sampling of the population is spot on. 

to make sample studies would be absolutely vital I think. 1000-1200 partipiciants would be enough.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Tell a friend

    Love Stool Pigeons Wire Message Board? Tell a friend!
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • ×
    • Create New...