Corona

I'm honestly not quite sure where this fits in, and I see there are already a few posts hitting this same note, but what I want to bring up is pretty specific and hasn't really been mentioned yet, which is kind of a bummer.

Over on the Politics board, we’ve seen plenty of attempts at statistical analysis or people trying to interpret the raw numbers we've been getting for this subject so far.
Of course, a little mistake here and there always manages to sneak in, doesn't it?

The real issue I'm seeing is that any discussion about those interpretations just gets wiped away without much logic behind it.

The specific case that prompted me to write this is actually pretty simple, and my goal is just to point out a classic example of how this works:

We have estimates for the virus mortality rates (basically looking at deaths relative to total infections);
we have those German estimates regarding how many people are infected but undetected (which would totally change the calculated mortality rate);
and then, on the flip side, we have Korea, which is testing incredibly intensely.
Those are our starting points.

So, logically, it follows that the number of undetected cases in Korea is probably tiny. Because of that, I guess applying some sort of standard "undetected rate" would basically just be massaging the numbers, which isn't really helpful if we're trying to describe things accurately or calculate true rates.
Also, mixing and matching bits of info like a cocktail without considering the context... well, that's a path full of traps, I think.

This observation doesn't really fit in with some of the very questionable math being thrown around, so I suppose it might not be the most welcome addition to the thread.

It feels to me like that kind of approach isn't exactly well-balanced, you know?

If we can't actually talk about arguments—or if only bad statistics are allowed—then we aren't going to get very far, and I don't really see the point of the conversation or what's actually left for us to discuss here.😁

I mean, I think it would be way better if people just provided counterarguments if they actually have them.

I know emotions are running pretty high right now; it's clearly not easy for anyone to deal with this or even moderate it.😁 So, I'll just stick to the purely numerical side of things in this post of mine.

-Steve

It just makes zero sense. A moderator hands out 200 points just for "trolling" or "spreading panic," even when you're simply explaining why it's methodologically flawed to run statistics based on inaccurate or incomplete data. Anything that doesn't align with what two moderators think—even if it comes from top-tier universities or major health organizations—gets labeled as fear-mongering and results in a ban.
So, there's really no point in trying to have a debate over there, because the whole thing is basically just a platform for people to suck up to the moderators, which is incredibly boring 😁

We don't have a backup plan.
So, I guess we really ought to try and make what we currently have even better, assuming there’s actually a need for it and a way to pull it off. 😁

It’s honestly not that easy to get all the loose ends tied up and manage the moderation side of things properly.
And, hey, I definitely wouldn't frame this as "mods versus the users." I really hope the mods won't see it that way either. 😁

-Steve

And here’s yet another case—

So, I was just looking at the data from the MOD, and they’re saying the mortality rate for people hospitalized with Corona is around 1.2%. I guess that's what the numbers are showing right now, maybe? It's a pretty specific figure, though!

So, I’m just saying—and maybe I'm wrong, but I really think—that if you look at the total population mortality rate outside of China (which, honestly, feels like a much more realistic way to view things for the rest of the world right now), we're looking at about 1.7%. The math he used to get to his specific number? It’s just... yeah, it's clearly double-counting. It's totally two-faced math. I guess it's just super obvious once you actually sit down and look at it!
I'm just laying all the cards on the table here, you know? I'm pointing these out because of all the different factors involved. I guess there's just so much to consider!
So, I’m actually laying out the specific numbers here to show how we ended up with that 1.7% figure. I guess it's all right there in the data!

Oh, he'll try to slip something else small past me right at the start, too—but honestly? I can handle that easily enough! 😁

Quote: lonebadger6 said:Look, Pod A—the mortality rate is just steadily dropping for pretty much every single disease out there. I mean, it's happening! I know, I know... you probably really don't want to admit that, but it's true!

I’m honestly a little confused here... like, I'm not really sure why you're saying that, or what exactly you think I'm being stubborn about? I guess I'm just wondering what specifically makes you feel like there's something I'm "refusing to accept." Maybe I missed something? I'd love to know what you're actually basing that on!

I mean, look, when it comes to Corona, things are definitely going to take a hit. Honestly, this whole idea that we’re just going to jump from 1.2% up to 7%? It’s just... I don't know, it feels like a total mathematical disaster. Like, seriously, it's borderline criminal how they're throwing those numbers around. It's just wrong.

Whose idea was this anyway? And like, where did you even stumble upon it? Maybe we should just head over there and hash it out in the original thread instead! 😁

I mean, honestly? It’s going to be such a massive headache trying to nail down the actual mortality rate for people hospitalized with Corona now. Everything is getting so much more complicated, and I guess we're really starting to see how much harder it is to get an accurate count when all these different factors start piling up at once. Maybe it'll settle down later, but right now? It feels like a total mess to calculate. Man, this lag is absolutely killing me! I don't know what's going on, but everything is just crawling. It’s so frustrating, I guess! Maybe it's my connection? Or maybe it's just one of those days where technology decides to be difficult. Ugh! I mean, honestly, it’s kind of expected, isn't it? Like, you’d probably see more deaths popping up among those already in the hospital, since those infections have actually already happened... whereas the new cases are just catching up. It’s just how the math works, I guess!

And honestly, it feels like right now, even our local cases are probably getting lumped in under that "hospitalized" category too... even though, I mean, if we're being totally real, it would be pretty tough to say they were actually flu cases. I guess it just works that way now!

I mean, honestly? Trying to make those comparisons regarding mortality rates for people in the hospital... it’s just practically impossible. I guess you could try, but it really doesn't work!

Under Section C—just a quick heads-up, that last bit of data isn't actually "outside of China," it’s more like...Outside of Hubei... maybe? I guess you could say we're looking at everything beyond that area!So, like, what kind of info are you actually looking for here? I mean, if you tell me exactly what you need, I might be able to dig it up! I guess I can try to find it, maybe... just let me know! So, I was just scrolling through Index earlier and saw this piece about the latest numbers on the Corona virus cases, and man, it’s kind of a lot to take in! It looks like things are shifting again, which—let's be honest—is just how it feels lately, right? Like, one minute you think you have a handle on what's happening, and then the next, the data changes everything. It seems like the spread is picking up in certain areas, and honestly, I guess it’s just that unpredictable nature of it all. Maybe we should be looking closer at what the CDC is saying? They’ve been putting out updates constantly, and it feels like every time I refresh my feed, there's some new detail about how the numbers are trending. I don't know, maybe I'm overthinking it, but it feels like we're in such a weird spot right now. One day it's one thing, the next it's another. It’s definitely a lot to process! Just wanted to share because it caught my eye and felt pretty heavy. Stay safe out there, everyone!
China is such a massive country, you know? I guess even from the very beginning, the mortality rates there weren't anywhere near what they were seeing over in Hubei. It’s just such a huge difference!

Alright, let me just simplify things here—basically, I’ve cut ties with everything coming out of China.

So, if we’re looking at a 1.7% mortality rate for the general population, I just don't see how the death rate for "hospitalized" patients could possibly be as low as 1.2%. It doesn't really add up to me, you know? And honestly, I'm kind of scratching my head over why anyone would even try to use that 1.2% figure as a baseline or a point of reference. It feels a bit off, I guess.

So, what I'm thinking is... mathematically speaking, it basically means one of two things happens. Either a huge chunk of people just pass away right at home, or they actually make it to the hospital, but then the doctors end up being the ones who kill them. I guess that's just how the numbers shake out, maybe? It’s pretty wild when you think about it! 😁
I don't know, I guess none of these solutions really seem that likely to work. Maybe? Just my two cents!

So, I just saw the post right after mine from another author, and they’re actually throwing out some specific percentages regarding those differences in hospitalization rates... which, I guess, really changes how you look at the whole math behind it all!

Yeah, but you really have to look at the infection numbers. According to the CDC, maybe 1 to 2% of people get hospitalized for the flu depending on the season, right? But with Corona, we don't actually know the exact rate yet because, well, this is all brand new to us. We're watching it happen in real time and nobody knows where the ceiling is, but some estimates are sitting around 10 to 15%. So, if those numbers hold, about 85 to 90% of people would pass through Corona without needing a hospital bed, whereas for the flu, it’s more like 98 to 99% of people stay home. And I guess that’s where the real trouble starts—it's all about system capacity. If this thing acts like the flu and sends more than 10% of patients to the hospital, I mean, honestly, no healthcare system in the country could handle that. Hospitals aren't just sitting there waiting exclusively for flu patients; they're already slammed. Like, even while we're typing here, places like Mayo Clinic are treating kidney patients at full capacity, or the local major medical center is packed with respiratory cases, and so on. There’s just no room left. That’s the real issue behind these statistics and why things feel so frantic. It has to stop; it can't just spread wildly without some kind of control.

It feels a little silly to keep posting if we can't actually have a real conversation, and I guess the whole topic loses its point if it's just being used to push bad statistics.

-Steve

briskjackal5 said:We don't have a backup plan.
So, I guess we really ought to try and make what we currently have even better, assuming there’s actually a need for it and a way to pull it off. 😁

It’s honestly not that easy to get all the loose ends tied up and manage the moderation side of things properly.
And, hey, I definitely wouldn't frame this as "mods versus the users." I really hope the mods won't see it that way either. 😁

-Steve

It’s impossible when they’re the only ones holding the tools to silence anyone who dares to disagree with them.🙂
In my opinion, the only way to deal with political threads is to just ignore them entirely, because discussing them becomes totally pointless with this style of moderation.

What’s the point of having a discussion where a moderator insists that 2+2=3, and if you dare to correct them, they just delete your post and hand out a ban?
Well, if that's the case, they can just enjoy their thread all by themselves, patting themselves on the back alongside everyone else who agrees with them, and leave it at that... It won't stop the virus, it won't change its characteristics, it won't lower mortality rates, and it certainly won't reduce panic in the end. All it does is drive away active users, which, honestly, is already a long-term trend on this forum anyway... 😁

Not to repeat what my esteemed colleague velvetmoose9 said, though I find myself in total agreement with their initial critique:

I have to agree—the moderator of the Politics section really deserves a stern talking-to for comparing the current Corona virus to the flu.
In terms of several key metrics, Corona is basically a joke compared to the flu... if I were allowed to say how I actually feel about it without getting myself penalized.

Still, much like any other relatively new virus, we should probably show it some respect.

It’s been proven that Corona can be fatal, mostly for the elderly, those with chronic illnesses, people who are malnourished, or just completely exhausted (for instance, medical staff in a certain province in China were subjected to days of grueling work—they barely ate or slept at all).
And it certainly has a massive potential to spread.

Furthermore, Corona is absolutely lethal to small warm-blooded, furry little creatures—like the rabbits used in pension funds, which is what worries me most, especially after that whole AgroCore robbery, as well as stocks in various companies, not just here but globally—you’ll soon be able to compare the data, comment, and see who lost out and who turned a profit.

For a very illustrative and educational look at the actual reality of Corona, you might want to search the depths of the internet for the March 1, 2020, episode of Nu2 with Aleksandar Stanković, featuring guest Professor Igor Rudan.
It calls for caution, but without the panic or the hysteria.
It dismantles and demystifies the myths and fears.
It’s presented in an incredibly accessible way, even for laypeople (truly an impressive presentation, much like a night at Dodger Stadium)

As things stand, the talk surrounding Corona remains more of a political issue than a health one, and personally, I think it’s quite an economic topic too.

Everyone seems fascinated by tracking the number of registered infections, cases, and recoveries, but the number most people are actually interested in is the death toll.

To keep yourselves from getting bored, maybe keep an eye on stock price fluctuations for certain companies—who’s buying, who’s selling, who’s crashing, and who’s profiting, right around when macroeconomists were predicting the start of a new recession and such.

I’ll admit, I’m currently feeling a tiny bit—maybe not even a tiny bit—fearful of the flu and those few viruses that push a fever above 100.4°F.

As for Corona... not in the slightest, as long as I have food to eat, water to drink, get at least six hours of sleep, and have access to Advil, Aspirin, and some nasal spray at the pharmacy, along with a nice bit of local moonshine and some propolis...

But what I fear most is the LJG virus—human stupidity.

Ultimately—this is the Politics section for messages, complaints, and comments.
You’ve complained.
You’ve commented.
Message received; we will reprimand the wicked moderator, as I mentioned earlier.
The Politics moderators will open a dedicated thread about Corona once they decide the conditions are right.

You won't be lamenting about Corona or anything else here.

crook

Adding this: there have been more than enough warnings. If you want to go hysterical, head over to Index. The internet is a big place.

You could also try posting over on Alternative; they occasionally welcome strange things over there.

Consider this my final warning: from now on, it’s a one-day ban for anyone inciting panic. There will be no further explanations.

If you honestly believe that silencing users—or even just cutting down the number of people participating in a thread who actually understand statistical modeling and viral impact way better than you and your fellow moderator—is some kind of effective strategy to fight an obvious pandemic, then by all means, keep going 👍
I could actually (statistically) prove to you that reducing the number of people discussing the virus, while stubbornly insisting that your own lack of understanding is the only truth, does absolutely nothing to stop the spread. In fact, I’m pretty sure I could demonstrate that the virus doesn't care whether you write about it or not.
But hey... who am I to question the methods of two moderators on a major US forum?

So, please, carry on 👍

Just keep breathing and living off the land, you'll make it through... Don't sweat the small stuff. Everything is perfectly clear, just as clear as the fact that you won't be coming back here to vent once this whole hysteria dies down.

As for those "fellow moderators" and the "far more expert forum users," I've got just one thing to say:

🤣 🤦 🤣 🤦 🤣 🤦 🤣 🤦 🤣

lonebadger6 said:Just keep breathing and living off the land, you'll make it through... Don't sweat the small stuff. Everything is perfectly clear, just as clear as the fact that you won't be coming back here to vent once this whole hysteria dies down.

As for those "fellow moderators" and the "far more expert forum users," I've got just one thing to say:

🤣 🤦 🤣 🤦 🤣 🤦 🤣 🤦 🤣

It seems you just can't grasp that the entire point isn't about mortality rates, or whether it's targeting the elderly versus the young, or if the sick are more at risk than the healthy, or even if this virus is deadlier than the flu or just a bad cold.
The real crux of the matter is that we simply don't know for sure yet. No one in the entire world has reached a definitive "this is it, let's go home" conclusion (except for you and our dear moderator).
And while the question remains open and the scientific community hasn't reached a unified consensus, most cases of Corona end up in hospital quarantine.
We are all painfully aware that there isn't enough capacity for that. Nor is there enough capacity for any additional measures should they become necessary.
If we are being honest about that, then we also have to acknowledge that if things get worse, some severe cases will inevitably receive inadequate treatment. And that could very well lead to an increase in mortality.

That is exactly what people are debating! Whatever happens... how we prepare for it and what specific measures are required. I mean, China is doing a hell of a job keeping it under control. That’s clearly a good thing, but nobody else in the world is implementing it like that.

So why on earth would you two "experts" try to stop people from discussing it? These are incredibly pressing topics within the scientific community itself. There is zero global consensus right now.

It’s honestly ridiculous to shut down the conversation and act like you're the ultimate authorities, refusing any debate just because you're certain of something that you can't actually prove—not that anyone else relevant in the world can prove it either!

In fact, if you're so confident, I suggest you publish a paper in the Scientist and maybe even make a little money off it. You might even snag a Nobel Prize while you're at it.

Go ahead and laugh all you want, but this kind of narrow-mindedness really just highlights how shallow your understanding of the subject is and how much you're actually embarrassing yourselves... 😢

I am absolutely certain that the forum leadership vetted the moderators' credentials. They must be high-level risk management doctors holding senior positions within the WHO, who clearly understand that there is zero cause for concern. After all, they are working with internal data that hasn't even been released to the public yet—all to serve the interests of the mask manufacturing lobbies—so things aren't quite dire enough to prevent them from finding time to moderate this forum. 👍

This thread is basically a car crash.

The moderator seems to be really leaning into this role of being the public savior—protecting us from any supposed panic—by deleting posts and banning anyone who dares to disagree with his "analysis."
The backbone of this alleged analysis? Unreliable statistics, blatant cherry-picking of those same unreliable stats, and a total failure to grasp how exponential growth actually works. Not to mention a complete misunderstanding of the risks involved when dealing with something largely unknown that happens to be spreading exponentially.

briskjackal5 is one of the few people actually writing quality posts and asking intelligent questions, yet the moderator is acting like a toddler in a sandbox, throwing tantrums under the guise of "preventing panic." He’s so caught up in the drama—as if he’s the only thing standing between us and everyone jumping off buildings out of pure terror.

Joseph Watson3 said:This thread is basically a car crash.

The moderator seems to be really leaning into this role of being the public savior—protecting us from any supposed panic—by deleting posts and banning anyone who dares to disagree with his "analysis."
The backbone of this alleged analysis? Unreliable statistics, blatant cherry-picking of those same unreliable stats, and a total failure to grasp how exponential growth actually works. Not to mention a complete misunderstanding of the risks involved when dealing with something largely unknown that happens to be spreading exponentially.

briskjackal5 is one of the few people actually writing quality posts and asking intelligent questions, yet the moderator is acting like a toddler in a sandbox, throwing tantrums under the guise of "preventing panic." He’s so caught up in the drama—as if he’s the only thing standing between us and everyone jumping off buildings out of pure terror.

If only it were just this one thread... ☕

There are plenty of other times where the mods claim they’ve got everything under control, even though they openly admit they don't have any actual expertise in the topics they're moderating. As soon as someone brings up some niche info—even if it's backed by legit sources—the mockery starts. They try to push you toward "alternative" views and eventually just slap you with a ban for trolling.
https://external-cdt1-1.xx.fbcdn.net...D4sKzpy1tdnUct
It’s honestly pathetic. The higher-ups should realize there's a real chance that behind these anonymous handles, there are actually highly informed, respected people. Even if that isn't the case—even if we're all just a bunch of clueless idiots—a forum should be a place for exchanging different perspectives by default.
Or am I wrong?

So this thread basically became the alternative because posts get banned just for citing data from the World Health Organization—all while the moderator sits there mocking everyone with comments like "is the zombie apocalypse starting yet?"

. I literally just read that the IMF is setting aside $50 billion to help countries hit by the virus.

Go ahead—dare to post that fact here.https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51732459

Joseph Watson3 said:This thread is basically a car crash.

The moderator seems to be really leaning into this role of being the public savior—protecting us from any supposed panic—by deleting posts and banning anyone who dares to disagree with his "analysis."
The backbone of this alleged analysis? Unreliable statistics, blatant cherry-picking of those same unreliable stats, and a total failure to grasp how exponential growth actually works. Not to mention a complete misunderstanding of the risks involved when dealing with something largely unknown that happens to be spreading exponentially.

briskjackal5 is one of the few people actually writing quality posts and asking intelligent questions, yet the moderator is acting like a toddler in a sandbox, throwing tantrums under the guise of "preventing panic." He’s so caught up in the drama—as if he’s the only thing standing between us and everyone jumping off buildings out of pure terror.

I just don't get it. They present themselves and their fellow moderator as top-tier experts, even though their analysis is completely off base. Meanwhile, they treat the rest of the community like they're all uneducated peasants who can barely find the keys on a keyboard.
I've personally tried to politely point out twice that you can't apply static analysis to dynamic models—that it's a complete mathematical error showing a deep lack of statistical understanding regarding future projections—and what do I get? A ban, all because apparently, I was "inciting panic."
And from what I can see, that's exactly what happened to Steve, too. He tries to explain why the methodology is flawed, and he ends up banned... 😁
It's reached a level where if you were on a fringe conspiracy forum and said the Earth was round, you'd get banned because the moderator decided it wasn't, and since they're such a "world-class expert," they know best. 😁 Then, if you show them a photo of Earth from space taken by NASA, they'll just ban you for implying the people at NASA are idiots.

Joseph Watson3 said:This thread is basically a car crash.

The moderator seems to be really leaning into this role of being the public savior—protecting us from any supposed panic—by deleting posts and banning anyone who dares to disagree with his "analysis."
The backbone of this alleged analysis? Unreliable statistics, blatant cherry-picking of those same unreliable stats, and a total failure to grasp how exponential growth actually works. Not to mention a complete misunderstanding of the risks involved when dealing with something largely unknown that happens to be spreading exponentially.

briskjackal5 is one of the few people actually writing quality posts and asking intelligent questions, yet the moderator is acting like a toddler in a sandbox, throwing tantrums under the guise of "preventing panic." He’s so caught up in the drama—as if he’s the only thing standing between us and everyone jumping off buildings out of pure terror.

Yeah, exactly—this thread is being moderated in an unusually stupid way.
From what I can tell, the moderator in question is leaning on velvetmoose9 because they're a doctor, following that logic of "well, I guess they know better than the random people on this forum!" And it all starts with those "clever" and supposedly hilarious posts on Facebook by I. Berecki.

It would be great if these self-appointed panic-stoppers—whether they're medical professionals or just pretending to be—realized that when they say "it's just like the flu" (or a cold, depending on how you read some of these posts), the average person hears "aha, great, so it's whatever, doesn't matter." It gives them an excuse to keep not washing their hands, while they laugh at the "panic-mongers" who refuse to shake hands (mostly because those "panic-mongers" have elderly relatives at home and don't want them ending up in the hospital if they get infected), and so on.

Real life situation:
"Oh please, this is ridiculous, I'm not actually going to disinfect my hands just to type in a passcode" (entering a room where sanitizer is clearly provided, nevermind) — "besides, I was already on the subway and touched the door handle... anyway, it's just a little virus that isn't any worse than the flu..."

And yeah, the flu is terrible and kills plenty of people every year, but that fact doesn't change the reality that some people catching Corona need hospitalization just to survive (if they do). Plus, we have a vaccine for the flu, and the same people avoiding handshakes because of Corona are usually the ones vaccinated against the flu. So, logically, the flu isn't a threat to them. But Corona? Call it "panic-mongering" if you want, but it is. It's precisely because we already deal with flu complications and sick people in hospitals that we need to make sure we don't become carriers for Corona, which acts just like the flu. We shouldn't be mocking the people who won't shake hands and calling them alarmists.

Good grief, what a mess
I just wanted to say that banning briskjackal5 was a total mistake.

Unban briskjackal5!

I think I finally figured out how this forum actually works
Basically, just stay far away from any topics that catch a moderator's eye and you'll be fine

I’m playing by the rules and adapting accordingly

I'm just a little worried that if the spotlight shifts back to migrants again... 😁

Lawrence Booth2 said:I think I finally figured out how this forum actually works
Basically, just stay far away from any topics that catch a moderator's eye and you'll be fine

I’m playing by the rules and adapting accordingly

I'm just a little worried that if the spotlight shifts back to migrants again... 😁

In this instance, the moderator is pushing the idea that the flu is worse than anything else—and heaven forbid anyone presents a contradiction to that vision. Whether it’s a personal opinion or just quoting an official institution, any disagreement results in an immediate ban. Look, he's entitled to his stance—fine—but banning anyone who politely offers a counterargument isn't moderation; it's a dictatorship.

All because we won't bow down to the fear-mongering coming out of some small-town fanatic.

Look, I get what's going on here
I’m not paying for the servers, nor am I running this outfit
Man, expecting an academic seminar on a forum we’re all using for free... hahahah
Besides, you pass college just by giving the professor exactly what they want to hear—even if it’s totally wrong😁

It’s not like we need total anarchy either

But if someone tries to ban me just because I read something online or in a book... and then shared it, posted a diagram, or a map that wasn't even high-res
Well, thanks for nothing
Count me out

Look, this thread was never even meant to be about politics.
Sure, if you want to stretch it, there’s a connection there—but honestly? It’s the absolute last thing people are actually debating here.