No one on here is kicking Kayleigh or Hope out of bed, not even Rate "Gone Piggin'" This.
Acceptable registrations in the queue through May 6 at 7:00p ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.
Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619
Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619
Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
Re: Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
I started out with nothing and I still have most of it.
Re: Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
Voting for Trump is dumber than playing Russian Roulette with fully loaded chambers.
**This space lives rent-free in BMW's head**
**This space lives rent-free in BMW's head**
Re: Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
We ling ago "flattened the curve."Rate This wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:21 pmIt’s about hospital capacities not deaths for the 10,000th time.km1125 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:00 pmIf you removed all the deaths caused in the early months by horrible policies (like putting infected folks back in elder-care facilities).... what would the real fatality rate be?
The medical community got caught a bit off guard not knowing how to treat this and relied too much on mechanical ventilators (which proved to be counterproductive). If you ignored those original numbers, what is the current CFR? Would it be closer to 0.8% or less?
Voting for Trump is dumber than playing Russian Roulette with fully loaded chambers.
**This space lives rent-free in BMW's head**
**This space lives rent-free in BMW's head**
Re: Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
You have to keep it flattened until there’s a vaccine. Places that are seeing flare ups like Wisconsin especially northwest Wisconsin are starting to have issues with it. That’s been a consistent thing no matter where it’s happened. ICU’s were overrun in June in Florida and Texas for example. At one point 45 ICU’s in Florida had run out of beds. That’s why you leave the curve flattened.Matt wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 7:25 pmWe ling ago "flattened the curve."Rate This wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:21 pmIt’s about hospital capacities not deaths for the 10,000th time.km1125 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:00 pmIf you removed all the deaths caused in the early months by horrible policies (like putting infected folks back in elder-care facilities).... what would the real fatality rate be?
The medical community got caught a bit off guard not knowing how to treat this and relied too much on mechanical ventilators (which proved to be counterproductive). If you ignored those original numbers, what is the current CFR? Would it be closer to 0.8% or less?
You people never learn.
Last edited by Rate This on Mon Oct 05, 2020 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- MotorCityRadioFreak
- Posts: 6488
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 6:26 am
- Location: Warren, MI
Re: Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
You flattened the curve for two seasons, and we likely have two more to go at least. We're in the bottom of the 5th inning, and COVID has still killed 200K+.
They/them, non-binary and proud.
Remember that “2000 Mules” was concocted by a circus of elephants.
The right needs to stop worry about what’s between people’s legs. Instead, they should focus on what’s between their ears.
Audacity sucks.
Remember that “2000 Mules” was concocted by a circus of elephants.
The right needs to stop worry about what’s between people’s legs. Instead, they should focus on what’s between their ears.
Audacity sucks.
Re: Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
And how many of those temporary hospital facilities we built were never at more than 1% capacity, if they had ANY people in there?? SO MANY people didn't have to die if they weren't turned away from medical care and told to fend for themselves at home, only to return to the hospital when they couldn't breath and needed ICU treatment. Much of that could have been avoided if we had taken advantage of all those temporary facilities.Rate This wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:21 pmIt’s about hospital capacities not deaths for the 10,000th time.km1125 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:00 pmIf you removed all the deaths caused in the early months by horrible policies (like putting infected folks back in elder-care facilities).... what would the real fatality rate be?
The medical community got caught a bit off guard not knowing how to treat this and relied too much on mechanical ventilators (which proved to be counterproductive). If you ignored those original numbers, what is the current CFR? Would it be closer to 0.8% or less?
Re: Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
When they were turned away they weren’t gasping for air. The temporary hospitals ended up not being needed because we flattened the curve. You have to keep it flattened or we go right back where we were.km1125 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:43 pmAnd how many of those temporary hospital facilities we built were never at more than 1% capacity, if they had ANY people in there?? SO MANY people didn't have to die if they weren't turned away from medical care and told to fend for themselves at home, only to return to the hospital when they couldn't breath and needed ICU treatment. Much of that could have been avoided if we had taken advantage of all those temporary facilities.Rate This wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:21 pmIt’s about hospital capacities not deaths for the 10,000th time.km1125 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:00 pmIf you removed all the deaths caused in the early months by horrible policies (like putting infected folks back in elder-care facilities).... what would the real fatality rate be?
The medical community got caught a bit off guard not knowing how to treat this and relied too much on mechanical ventilators (which proved to be counterproductive). If you ignored those original numbers, what is the current CFR? Would it be closer to 0.8% or less?
Re: Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
Ah, but folks were still dying in big numbers back then. So what's really important.. the number sick or the number dying?? Many could have been saved with a modicum of care if we used those facilities.Rate This wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 2:46 pmWhen they were turned away they weren’t gasping for air. The temporary hospitals ended up not being needed because we flattened the curve. You have to keep it flattened or we go right back where we were.km1125 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:43 pmAnd how many of those temporary hospital facilities we built were never at more than 1% capacity, if they had ANY people in there?? SO MANY people didn't have to die if they weren't turned away from medical care and told to fend for themselves at home, only to return to the hospital when they couldn't breath and needed ICU treatment. Much of that could have been avoided if we had taken advantage of all those temporary facilities.Rate This wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:21 pmIt’s about hospital capacities not deaths for the 10,000th time.km1125 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:00 pmIf you removed all the deaths caused in the early months by horrible policies (like putting infected folks back in elder-care facilities).... what would the real fatality rate be?
The medical community got caught a bit off guard not knowing how to treat this and relied too much on mechanical ventilators (which proved to be counterproductive). If you ignored those original numbers, what is the current CFR? Would it be closer to 0.8% or less?
Re: Trump and Melania Test Positive for COVID
If you can’t get the number that are sick under control then you have nothing. Since there is no cure for it the only angle is prevention. Currently one party is clearly for that and the other parties new motto is “What Virus?”.km1125 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 3:56 pmAh, but folks were still dying in big numbers back then. So what's really important.. the number sick or the number dying?? Many could have been saved with a modicum of care if we used those facilities.Rate This wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 2:46 pmWhen they were turned away they weren’t gasping for air. The temporary hospitals ended up not being needed because we flattened the curve. You have to keep it flattened or we go right back where we were.km1125 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:43 pmAnd how many of those temporary hospital facilities we built were never at more than 1% capacity, if they had ANY people in there?? SO MANY people didn't have to die if they weren't turned away from medical care and told to fend for themselves at home, only to return to the hospital when they couldn't breath and needed ICU treatment. Much of that could have been avoided if we had taken advantage of all those temporary facilities.Rate This wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:21 pmIt’s about hospital capacities not deaths for the 10,000th time.km1125 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:00 pmIf you removed all the deaths caused in the early months by horrible policies (like putting infected folks back in elder-care facilities).... what would the real fatality rate be?
The medical community got caught a bit off guard not knowing how to treat this and relied too much on mechanical ventilators (which proved to be counterproductive). If you ignored those original numbers, what is the current CFR? Would it be closer to 0.8% or less?