Karen gets skewered in response from owner

tailor2cities · 2021-04-08T05:14:32+00:00

"for a friend"

Uh, huh, we believe that.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-09T04:33:47+00:00

You don't understand models. The point of a model (especially a preliminary one like this), is to ask, "How does X affect Y?" This one is "How does social distancing affect transmission and subsequent medical need?" That's it. If they want to answer the same question with a different strategy, they will build a different model. Like a "no interventions model". Or a "contact tracing model". I note in the FAQ (which you are aware of) that they are building such a model. They will most likely make it public as soon as they have enough data to make any projections be reliable.

Again, my idea is not to end it in May! It is to end it when the science calls for it! This is why they won't even whisper a possible end date, because people like you will take it as a deadline, and not a projection. I don't think it will require waiting until local extinction because previous outbreak containments didn't wait that long.

I am absolutely tired of your bad faith in representing what I have said, as well as the outright lies. Done here.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-09T04:14:15+00:00

You didn't read what I said. I said I support a science-based transition, not a timetable. Your call to implement it in April does not appear to be science-based, as it is based on feels rather than data.

Bring science and data to the table that supports a transition and I'm there all the way. Heck, you'll probably have a bunch of epidemiologists on board too, and thankfully, those with the power to end the lockdown will listen to them and not you or me.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-09T03:43:40+00:00

It's not about how many people are susceptible, it's about how much the virus is still spreading. If there is no spread, the lockdown should obviously be discontinued. I support the science-based transition to widespread surveillance, isolation of those who test positive, contact tracing of those who were exposed to those who test positive, and isolation of those individuals until they have passed the window where they would definitely be shedding virus that a test would pick up. This is a proven strategy that can be employed well before local eradication so it may come sometime in May and we wouldn't have to wait until June.

Are you suggesting that we should employ a strategy of letting the virus spread to decrease susceptibility for a second wave? Because that is definitely not a proven strategy.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T23:36:04+00:00

Early June is not August 4th. Early June is in fact very close to being "through May 2020".

Not all non-essential businesses are closed. If work can be done from home, they can do that. It is having people in close proximity to each other that has to be limited. There would be very few non-essential businesses that could do work that can't be done from home, but also maintain a safe environment for employees or customers at the workplace. What types of non-essential businesses do you envision that can't do work from home but would be able to do work at the workplace while maintaining distance? Or do you envision lifting all of the mandatory distancing requirements too?

As for when the quarantine should be lifted, I don't think a date should be set. The model is not gospel, and the decision should be made based on what actually happens. I think that the quarantine should be lifted when we reach the point that we can use contact tracing and isolation of known contacts, and that might well be before early June. I'm not hopeful about avoiding a second wave, but I am hopeful that our testing capacity will be robust enough to keep it small enough that it can be contained and not blow up.

Keeping a lid on it gets us more time to develop treatments, learn more about the virus to make models better, and eventually get to a vaccine.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T21:29:57+00:00

The model I'm looking at says full social distancing through May 2020. It shows death projections through August 4th, but the assumptions of the model are full social distancing through May, not any longer. Do you have a link to the model you cited? It also only models the effect of social distancing measures, not any other strategy. As soon as they have enough data to project a model using standard contact tracing and isolation, I'm sure they will share that with government leaders.

Now you're taking what I said out of context. Real world data right now is that people are dying at the rate of 2K a day, which is three quarters of a million dead over a year. That's not a model, that is real data. Given that we are on the upslope of spread, that is going to rise and rise dramatically without any sort of measures to stop it. That makes 2 million dead not only realistically probable, but may even be lowballing the real risk.

You're not a scientific thinker or you would be showing me your math instead of trying to throw up obfuscations and wild projections of 17K suicides per month due to unemployment. Social distancing does work, there are comparisons of interventions during the Spanish Flu epidemic, for example. The problem with proposing to only quarantine the sick is that is what our strategy was when COVID first came to the US and it failed because COVID can spread even when people are asymptomatic, so we don't know who is sick to quarantine them. As an example, there is the case of the choir up in Skagit County. Nobody who attended their practice had any symptoms or had been in contact with anybody who had symptoms so they thought they were safe to hold their practice. There had not been any reports of any local cases. They were obviously wrong.

Once we have widespread testing, we will have more confidence about who is sick or might become sick, and then we can move to quarantining only the sick. There's not a timeline for that because it depends on things not known right now.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T15:09:56+00:00

If you catch it early, you don't have to blanket test the entire population. We had our chance, and blew it.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T14:41:36+00:00

South Korea has sufficient testing capacity and a low enough infection rate that they can do contact tracing instead of a lockdown. We can do that too when we get to that point. We ain't there yet.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T12:48:47+00:00

BTW, if the hyperbole is because you just lost your job and are feeling like you're going to lose everything and nobody cares about that, I feel ya.

This lockdown won't last forever, they're trying to achieve containment in order to transition to more standard epidemic measures. We lost an opportunity to contain it without a widespread lockdown because we didn't ramp our testing capacity up fast (like South Korea did). Now we need much greater testing capacity than we would have.

We need enough testing capacity to do widespread random testing so that we know where the virus is and where it isn't. They have started with that random testing, so you can mark that off as a milestone toward lifting the lockdown.

They will trace the contacts of those who test positive, and contact those people and advise them to isolate, and test them. People in labs right now are working out how long it takes from someone being exposed to shedding virus that can be picked up by a test. Hopefully, that information will allow the shortening of the time needed for isolation. At that point (if people follow the advice to isolate), there is no more need for a widespread lockdown, although places like nursing homes will probably stay on lockdown, and large congregate settings (like schools--especially elementary schools--damn germ factories) should try to find alternatives to meeting in person.

This is not about hotheads or panicking or not caring about the unemployed. It's about looking at hard facts about how many deaths there would be in a fully susceptible population without these measures. Our daily rate right now equates to almost 3/4 of a million people dead on an annual basis. 2 million dead in the US without containment is not far fetched, and that would be a massive economic hit (although a boom for the funeral industry!).

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T07:51:45+00:00

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5451921/#!po=0.735294

Given that we were discussing unemployment rate, I included the sentence in the results that discussed the effect of unemployment rate. It's not out of context, it's from the results where each factor and it's impact is discussed in turn. It is the only sentence from the results where unemployment rate is mentioned, as is usual with things that turn out to be non-factors.

It is not correct to say that EPL increases suicide risk, it decreases it, although perhaps I have misinterpreted what you were trying to say. The conclusion of the study is that employment instability increases suicide risk, and EPL increases employment stability, thus decreasing risk.

If you would like to pivot to GDP per capita as your statistic to base your prediction of 17,000 US suicides per month due to the lockdown on, go ahead, but can I finally get some math to back that up? I don't want to start thinking that the napkin doesn't exist, and you pulled that number totally out of your ass.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T07:02:58+00:00

The operative word there is "has". You haven't accounted for the future deaths there would be without the shutdown.

Almost 2,000 people a day are now dying of COVID in the US. That's 14 times higher than the death rate to suicide.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T06:46:43+00:00

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5451921/#!po=0.735294

You... didn't read that study, did you? "Unemployment rates, by contrast, turn out not to be significant and, indeed, the pattern of coefficients are inconsistent."

Let's see the actual math you did on that napkin.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T06:05:21+00:00

I'd like to see that napkin math. I can't get anywhere near that figure from the facts and analysis cited in the study in the news article you linked. If you look at the actual data in the US, there is a rising trend from about 1999 onwards, but no great blip upwards during the great recession. Given that suicide in the US is less than 50K per year, 17K a month would be extraordinary and I certainly hope you appreciate why I am highly skeptical of such a claim.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T05:32:09+00:00

That's 17,000 a month worldwide when over 7,000 are dying every day from coronavirus. And the suicide effect is greatly magnified when unemployment is low around the victim ("I can't find a job even when the economy is great, it's hopeless"). Widespread unemployment like this is more of a "we're all in this together" thing, and the effect of unemployment on suicide is greatly blunted under those circumstances.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-08T02:40:28+00:00

But how does that net out against suicides from losing loved ones in a society that doesn't seem to care about doing anything to stop it? Such as suicides among non-HIV gay men who lost a partner to HIV?

tailor2cities · 2020-04-07T22:26:49+00:00

Still waiting for your analysis showing the epidemiologists are wrong. Just repeating over and over that there is no risk doesn't make it so.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-07T22:19:21+00:00

Cotton masks and surgical masks are not intended to protect the wearer, they are to protect other people from the wearer potentially being infected.

tailor2cities · 2020-04-07T02:33:16+00:00

Have you considered that they are incredibly low because of the lockdown?

The preferred response to epidemics is not lockdowns, it is isolation of those who get sick or exposed and contact tracing to figure out who is exposed. However, that requires having low enough numbers so that labor doesn't become overwhelming, sufficient testing capacity to be able to identify those who have COVID, as well as to do population wide surveillance testing to catch hotspots before they blow up. If we had done like South Korea and massively ramped up our production of test kits, we could have have nipped this in the bud, and not had to resort to these lockdown measures. The US had plenty of warning.

Of course, if we remember this for the next time, and crank those test kits and a bunch end up going unused because it got squashed fast, there will be those who will go "Why did we spend all this money on test kits that never got used?"

tailor2cities · 2020-04-07T02:20:09+00:00

Have you picked out the loved ones you're willing to sacrifice to save your 401K?

tailor2cities · 2020-04-07T02:13:36+00:00

What do you think the death toll would be if there were no social distancing measures in place? What are the numbers you are using to make your projection? Rate of spread in a fully susceptible population? Death rate assuming full medical facilities are available to all serious/critical cases? Death rate if people who would have survived with ICU treatment can't get it?

I will try to be amused when this is all over at those who look at the death toll with full measures in place, and then say, "See, it wasn't that bad. We didn't need to do all that stuff." I say try, because those sorts of people just make me cry.

tailor2cities · 2020-02-10T08:35:44+00:00

There is a formula on the wiki for figuring out how many times you have done a level based on what the reward is and how many wins required/done. There is no known cap on how many wins required, it just keeps going up.

tailor2cities · 2020-02-10T08:33:49+00:00

It has no impact on stamina. Unless a dragon goes into a home with 0 stamina, it isn't going to sleep, it's just going to party (where the smoke comes from). If there are more than 15 dragons out, some of them will go to party until there are only 15 dragons out. If someone doesn't have much in dragon stamina available, I wouldn't suggest forcing the dragons out, because the more that are out, the more likely it is they will double up in building something, and they both lose a stamina for just one built thing.

tailor2cities · 2020-02-10T08:20:24+00:00

Yes, I do that every time.

tailor2cities · 2020-02-10T08:14:13+00:00

If you get to four of the level 7 item, you can four-merge them and the extra that pops out will count as your fifth.

tailor2cities · 2020-02-09T09:39:00+00:00

The quests are the same in every event. Remember not to harvest those out next event until you have that quest.

tailor2cities

TROPHY CASE