Sun n Fun in the time of Coronavirus

[steingar]

May might be better, might not.  If we're not clear of this by late July I think we're all in a world of hurt.  And given the way things are going I suspect a lot of graduates are going to be getting their degrees in the mail. We're on remote instruction for the rest of the semester, which ends April 20.  I can't believe they'd host a giant gathering two weeks later.

[Parker_Woodruff]

They've asked for feedback from exhibitors on whether we would attend in May.

[exM20K]

20 minutes ago, Parker_Woodruff said:

They've asked for feedback from exhibitors on whether we would attend in May.

That's going to be a tough sell for the major manufacturers.  Logistics  / demo planes / people / housing / trade show displays etc will be very hard to pull together at another time, and if I were asked, I'd not give it serious consideration as there is no guarantee that things will be any different one month later.

The Diamond display at OSH used to have four or five of my planes, and it was not a trivial exercise to get them in one place at the same time.  I'd sit tight till OSH (as a vendor).

-dan

[Aerodon]

5 hours ago, 59Moonster said:

Looks like KC MO has banned gatherings of more than 1000 people. 
 

This virus is causing more stir than it’s worth. Nobody bats an eye at the flu, but now everything is getting shut down while Indirectly making everyone want to drink a Corona. 

Get your head out of the sand.  It spreads just like flu, but has 10x the fatality rate.  Very low with kids <10, very high with seniors.  Flu kills 30,000 people per year, probably pushes a lot of seniors over the edge too.  Can you imagine if that was 300,000 in the USA alone.

Our local neighbourhood is a hotspot in Canada, and a lot of people are being tested, 10 local cases, one fatality.  

I prefer the odds of high risk activities like flying, skiing, scuba diving etc which are around 1:10,000.

Aerodon

[Scott Dennstaedt, PhD]

Interesting to see that @sunnfunflyin blocked a Twitter follower because they had suggested "Be smart and cancel the event." 

[ragedracer1977]

19 hours ago, Aerodon said:

Get your head out of the sand.  It spreads just like flu, but has 10x the fatality rate.  Very low with kids <10, very high with seniors.  Flu kills 30,000 people per year, probably pushes a lot of seniors over the edge too.  Can you imagine if that was 300,000 in the USA alone.

Our local neighbourhood is a hotspot in Canada, and a lot of people are being tested, 10 local cases, one fatality.  

I prefer the odds of high risk activities like flying, skiing, scuba diving etc which are around 1:10,000.

Aerodon

Please don't fear monger.  We have no idea what the mortality rate is.

 

[aviatoreb]

2 hours ago, ragedracer1977 said:

Please don't fear monger.  We have no idea what the mortality rate is.

 

We do have an idea and the idea is becoming more informed as time goes on. As professionals collect catalogue and interpret data.

And

https://www.kff.org/

we do have an idea and the preliminary data is informative even if it is not the definitive outcome that we will not know until Until the paleoepiddmiologists can do a backward looking study in 10 years.  Meanwhile with the data in hand the specialists are definitely live-stream doing their best to estimate and update their estimates on the fly.  This gives an excellent but not perfect idea and these estimates point to a major problem worth a major proactive response.

Just like a weather forecast 24 hours in advance suggesting a high probability of a major cat 5 storm on the one hand we can not say definitively what the details of the storm here will be in 24 hours (like we will be able to say backward looking in the future) but it is incorrect to therefore conclude we have no idea that yes a major storm is bearing down and winds will be massive - say forecast gusting to 150mph plus or minus 25?  Having no idea suggests... or it might be sunny and breezy don’t bother worrying about it.

E

Edited March 14, 2020 by aviatoreb

[ragedracer1977]

Just now, aviatoreb said:

We do have an idea and the idea is becoming more informed as time goes on.

And

https://www.kff.org/

we do have an idea and the preliminary data is informative even if it is not the definitive outcome that we will not know until Until the paleoepiddmiologists can do a backward looking study in 10 years.  Meanwhile with the data in hand the specialists are definitely live-stream doing their best to estimate and update their estimates on the fly.  This gives an excellent but not perfect idea and these estimates point to a major problem worth a major proactive response.

Just like a weather forecast 24 hours in advance suggesting a high probability of a major cat 5 storm on the one hand we can not say definitively what the details of the storm here will be in 24 hours (like we will be able to say backward looking in the future) but it is incorrect to therefore conclude we have no idea that yes a major storm is bearing down and winds will be massive - day gusting to 150mph plus or minus 25?  Having no idea suggests... or it might be sunny and breezy don’t bother worrying about it.

E

I didn't so don't worry about it. 

I said don't fear monger.

We don't know if it's 10x mortality rate.  We have absolutely no idea how many people have it, and therefore can't possibly do more than guess.

Further, the mortality rate for children is ZERO. 

[aviatoreb]

5 minutes ago, ragedracer1977 said:

I didn't so don't worry about it. 

I said don't fear monger.

We don't know if it's 10x mortality rate.  We have absolutely no idea how many people have it, and therefore can't possibly do more than guess.

Further, the mortality rate for children is ZERO. 

You and I have a dramatically different idea of the phrase “no idea”.

and the phrase “fear monger.”

do you say the same thing to the weather man when they say a thunderstorm is coming and it can never be said with 100% certainty and therefore we have no idea and the weather man should stop fear monger it.  Go ahead and plan the picnic tomorrow at noon at the beach.

... and it is not zero for children.  Apparently there have been children a very few thankfully and generally young people also who have died.  Just relatively very few.  zero even with capital letters is not correct.

Edited March 14, 2020 by aviatoreb

[ragedracer1977]

Just now, aviatoreb said:

You and I have a dramatically different idea of the phrase “no idea”.

Apparently so.  

Show me the hard data on how many people have it.  How many have been tested in the US? Look at Chinas numbers. Do you believe them?

We won't have any real idea for quite a while.  The study on the Diamond Princess suggests up to 50% of those infected don't show any symptoms at all.

https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.10.2000180

[aviatoreb]

Just now, ragedracer1977 said:

Apparently so.  

Show me the hard data on how many people have it.  How many have been tested in the US? Look at Chinas numbers. Do you believe them?

We won't have any real idea for quite a while.  The study on the Diamond Princess suggests up to 50% of those infected don't show any symptoms at all.

https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.10.2000180

I showed you data collected daily by the world health organization but you say show me everyone.  You want a paleoepideniologist rather than an epidemiologist.  You want to count all the dead after it’s all over and I’m interested to hear from the public health care professionals as the event is unfolding.  This is the difference between forecasting and post casting.  The difference between preparation and history.

in The WHO data I shared with you included an impressively complete data set acquired from South Korea which has hundreds of thousands of tests on a free and voluntary basis and a complete age stratefied outcomes assessment.

That is what data is and forecasting is.  The clear picture that is emerging is this is significantly more deadly than standard flu on the order of 10x and the number emerging from South Korea is 0.8%.  I find the data collected and reported by the WHO from South Korea and from around the world to be relevant and you call it fear mongering.  I am not willing to wait for the historical assessment to be finally written with perfect accuracy in 10 years before I react today to the best available data available today. And that data captures a clearer picture every day.

 

[ragedracer1977]

Not being zero for children is news to me. As of last night, deaths reported for those under ten years old was zero. Do you have new information?

[neilpilot]

Just now, ragedracer1977 said:

Not being zero for children is news to me. As of last night, deaths reported for those under ten years old was zero. Do you have new information?

Not sure what you consider a child.  In China the death rate in the 10-19 year age range was 0.2%.

[ragedracer1977]

Under ten. 

[aviatoreb]

Just now, ragedracer1977 said:

Not being zero for children is news to me. As of last night, deaths reported for those under ten years old was zero. Do you have new information?

Please do primary research rather than listening to your favorite news source.  I read yesterday that there were a few and it’s somewhere in that extensive who page. But I’m not going to dig it out again for you since it’s just a side point to the general concept of the idea of data and preparation vs fear mongering.  And anyway it will not change either of our behaviors if it’s zero or a dozen around the world in that age group.

[aviatoreb]

Just now, ragedracer1977 said:

Under ten. 

You feel like you are going to win a grand point if it’s 0.2% (which converts to large numbers of actual people) for 10-12 and zero with a big z for 0-9 and then you will win a grand battle that preparation and data collection is only for fear mongering? I honestly don’t understand why.

[ragedracer1977]

Just now, aviatoreb said:

Please do primary research rather than listening to your favorite news source.  I read yesterday that there were a few and it’s somewhere in that extensive who page. But I’m not going to dig it out again for you since it’s just a side point to the general concept of the idea of data and preparation vs fear mongering.  And anyway it will not change either of our behaviors if it’s zero or a dozen around the world in that age group.

I've been reading articles on this for weeks.  I've not seen a single example of a child under ten dying.

Every scientific report I've read indicates that they don't know the mortality rate.  Those that make calculations using real data (ie the cruise ship) are estimating .5%. that's not 10x the flu .

[neilpilot]

Just now, ragedracer1977 said:

Under ten. 

OK, you have a unique definition since the legal definition is a minor.  When my daughter was 12 I certainly considered her a child.

[aviatoreb]

10 minutes ago, ragedracer1977 said:

I've been reading articles on this for weeks.  I've not seen a single example of a child under ten dying.

Every scientific report I've read indicates that they don't know the mortality rate.  Those that make calculations using real data (ie the cruise ship) are estimating .5%. that's not 10x the flu .

Ok you win there is nothing to worry about.  Everyone is over reacting and fear mongering especially WHO.  Thank you for correcting us.

Edited March 14, 2020 by aviatoreb

[MoonFlyer68]

It is getting real now.....LOL

[ragedracer1977]

9 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

Ok you win there is nothing to worry about.  Everyone is over reacting and fear mongering especially WHO.  Thank you for correcting us.

Yes, they are overreacting.  

Have you been to the grocery store???

[aviatoreb]

18 minutes ago, ragedracer1977 said:

Yes, they are overreacting.  

Have you been to the grocery store???

I really don't understand what you are insisting.  So may I summarize.  You do know the people at WHO are aware of the princess cruise and the several hundred people on board and their narrow age group stratification.  And there are several still in intensive care and we all hope every one of those recovers.  But you insist your statistics of taking a straight average and rejecting all other data makes you a better and sharper statistician than the people trained in exactly this topic who are working in organizations like WHO, and the CDC and the like CDC-like form different countries across the world.  And even with your smaller data group you are arguing it is exactly 0.5% and even 0.8% is therefore clearly wrong and further 0.5% is much much different from 0.8% that standard seasonal flu with estimates up to 0.1% is therefore way different from 10x and therefore we are all fear mongering and you just know better than the experts.  Based on a small sample.  

I am actually well trained in statistics.  A thorough statistical analysis does not involve simply taking a bulk number on top and diving by another bulk number on the bottom.  There are ways to capture the confidence level, the power of a statistic, the distribution, the likelihood and many many other aspects of describing the quality of a statistical assessment.  This kind of mathematics I know very well.  However I am in no way an expert in public health, which is nonetheless a topic that uses statistics, but I am confident that these scientists know what they are doing and constantly hone their skills on various incidents and update their models in this incident daily.

I actually believe the CDC and WHO also have access to that same data that you have chosen at the exclusion of all others, and other data sets, and other kinds of information too.  I have faith that these scientists know their business in more detail than declaring that all you need to do is look at the princess cruise ship throw away all other data, and divide the numerator by the denominator.

Are you that guy who when they forecast a hurricane with winds up to 150 mph and then a hurricane hits and it was only 120mph at your local you laugh at your neighbors for fear mongering?

Yes I have been to the grocery story.  I ran out of creamer for my coffee after lunch - so I went and I bought some cream, and a box of dove bars.

Edited March 14, 2020 by aviatoreb

[ragedracer1977]

You're grasping at straws. You're trying to put words in my mouth. 

If we can't have a sane discussion, I'll bow out.

[Tim Jodice]

22 minutes ago, ragedracer1977 said:

Yes, they are overreacting.  

Have you been to the grocery store???

I went to the grocery store about 2 hours ago.  All the food you could want is available. Toilet paper, not so much. Why?

If I had a panic attack I can't imagine that having alot of toilet paper would make me relax.

[aviatoreb]

20 minutes ago, ragedracer1977 said:

You're grasping at straws. You're trying to put words in my mouth. 

If we can't have a sane discussion, I'll bow out.

No, I am just declaring that I find it deeply bizarre that in this era generally that folks are confident to declare that they know how to do division so they know more than all the scientists world wide with actual data, and trained how to actually use it.

And you declare I am grasping at straws.  I am a mathematics professor and I am very well trained in how detailed statistical analysis go, but I would never dare to declare knowledge of the actual outcome of a statistical analysis made by hundreds of scientists from a specific field like public health at organizations like the WHO, the CDC and the like at other nations, without not only seeing the actual underlying data but also spending time with it, but also the domain specific details of how that kind of data works - and I do not have that domain specific knowledge.  In other words, I am declaring I respect scientists from their domain know how to do their job and I am listening.  It is an interesting time when it is considered acceptable in some circles to declare all the scientists are wrong because you have a cherry picked data set.  You assert that is not sane unless I reject their collective analysis and accept your back of the envelope computation based on division analysis of a narrow cherry picked data set.  You assert that means I am grasping at straws and you know and that they are wrong and you are right.  

Not agreeing with you to reject all the scientists and to listen to you instead is not equivalent to I am not sane.

Edited March 14, 2020 by aviatoreb