New York City Police Alone
4,400 cases of Covid 19, 2,200 have recovered 31 have died.
0
-
Even with my public school math, that's not an impressive fatality rate for a supposedly deadly virus.armilite said:4,400 cases of Covid 19, 2,200 have recovered 31 have died.0 -
I am constantly hearing about the numbers of positive cases, the number of recoveries, and the number of deaths
- but I never hear the base number.
For instance, with 4,400 positives cases stated above, if that is a base of 5,000; that is huge.
However, if the base number is 50,000 (and I have no idea how many New York City Police there are), the number of deaths (percentage) - significantly changes.
It is not that I am too lazy to determine the base number by myself. I just think it should be part of the initial conversation.
I just could not stand the suspense - so I Googled the answer. According to Google there are 55,305 "employees" in the New York City police department. That is .056 percent or approximately one death for every 1,950 people.
Do you know (defining "know" as exchanging Christmas cards or have their cell phone number) 1,950 people?
Have any of those 1,950 people died within the last three - or even two - months?3 -
Fuzzy math. 4400 cases and 2200 recovered. So far 31 dead. Can you extrapolate that out of the almost 2200 still ill another 31 will die? That would be 1 out of 70 (1.4%) that are infected die. That would also double your death rate for the department to .11%. Not a big difference but shows that the only correct figures will come after this event is over. That is why the models the government are using seem to change daily. I don't have a lot of faith in those models. Kind of like the weatherman - guess enough times and you are bound to be right once in a while. BobUS Military Guy said:I am constantly hearing about the numbers of positive cases, the number of recoveries, and the number of deaths
- but I never hear the base number.
For instance, with 4,400 positives cases stated above, if that is a base of 5,000; that is huge.
However, if the base number is 50,000 (and I have no idea how many New York City Police there are), the number of deaths (percentage) - significantly changes.
It is not that I am too lazy to determine the base number by myself. I just think it should be part of the initial conversation.
I just could not stand the suspense - so I Googled the answer. According to Google there are 55,305 "employees" in the New York City police department. That is .056 percent or approximately one death for every 1,950 people.
Do you know (defining "know" as exchanging Christmas cards or have their cell phone number) 1,950 people?
Have any of those 1,950 people died within the last three - or even two - months?
0 -
Using models is what creates fuzzy math. Let's talk about what is happening - not what could happen. I thought that was the point in quoting the current numbers. I used to build models, when I was a child, but have little use for them now.BobJudy said:
Fuzzy math. 4400 cases and 2200 recovered. So far 31 dead. Can you extrapolate that out of the almost 2200 still ill another 31 will die? That would be 1 out of 70 (1.4%) that are infected die. That would also double your death rate for the department to .11%. Not a big difference but shows that the only correct figures will come after this event is over. That is why the models the government are using seem to change daily. I don't have a lot of faith in those models. Kind of like the weatherman - guess enough times and you are bound to be right once in a while. BobUS Military Guy said:I am constantly hearing about the numbers of positive cases, the number of recoveries, and the number of deaths
- but I never hear the base number.
For instance, with 4,400 positives cases stated above, if that is a base of 5,000; that is huge.
However, if the base number is 50,000 (and I have no idea how many New York City Police there are), the number of deaths (percentage) - significantly changes.
It is not that I am too lazy to determine the base number by myself. I just think it should be part of the initial conversation.
I just could not stand the suspense - so I Googled the answer. According to Google there are 55,305 "employees" in the New York City police department. That is .056 percent or approximately one death for every 1,950 people.
Do you know (defining "know" as exchanging Christmas cards or have their cell phone number) 1,950 people?
Have any of those 1,950 people died within the last three - or even two - months?
I am a huge proponent of living in the here and now. If society is going to go with what "might" happen, we just as well throw in the damn up river breaking, a passenger airplane crashing into a crowded sports stadium, a large meteor impact or even the Sun going supernova.
Your analogy on the weatherman's predictions is spot on. I love it when they tell me there is a "chance" of showers - and I had to stop mowing because it is raining cats and dogs. Still . . . if the sky is dark and the lawn needs mowed, I am going to start the mower instead of waiting to see, if the weatherman was right - or wrong - again. Of course, I am trying to mow my yard and not factoring in the height of the grass in the parking lot in Iran. You know . . . here and now.6 -
I agree with your outlook and was trying to point out the futility of using predictions (modeling) before all the facts are known. For instance it could be argued that jumping off a 100 story building is no more dangerous than a 1 story roof. If you monitor the 100 story jumper he is doing pretty good for the first 99 floors, so it must be the last 10 feet that is deadly. So just using those observations the fatality rate for 100 or 1 story must be the same. That seems to be the kind of thinking that has gone into a lot of the covid modeling. Like you I react to the current conditions but do temper that with plans for tomorrow based on todays conditions. BobUS Military Guy said:
Using models is what creates fuzzy math. Let's talk about what is happening - not what could happen. I thought that was the point in quoting the current numbers. I used to build models, when I was a child, but have little use for them now.BobJudy said:
Fuzzy math. 4400 cases and 2200 recovered. So far 31 dead. Can you extrapolate that out of the almost 2200 still ill another 31 will die? That would be 1 out of 70 (1.4%) that are infected die. That would also double your death rate for the department to .11%. Not a big difference but shows that the only correct figures will come after this event is over. That is why the models the government are using seem to change daily. I don't have a lot of faith in those models. Kind of like the weatherman - guess enough times and you are bound to be right once in a while. BobUS Military Guy said:I am constantly hearing about the numbers of positive cases, the number of recoveries, and the number of deaths
- but I never hear the base number.
For instance, with 4,400 positives cases stated above, if that is a base of 5,000; that is huge.
However, if the base number is 50,000 (and I have no idea how many New York City Police there are), the number of deaths (percentage) - significantly changes.
It is not that I am too lazy to determine the base number by myself. I just think it should be part of the initial conversation.
I just could not stand the suspense - so I Googled the answer. According to Google there are 55,305 "employees" in the New York City police department. That is .056 percent or approximately one death for every 1,950 people.
Do you know (defining "know" as exchanging Christmas cards or have their cell phone number) 1,950 people?
Have any of those 1,950 people died within the last three - or even two - months?
I am a huge proponent of living in the here and now. If society is going to go with what "might" happen, we just as well throw in the damn up river breaking, a passenger airplane crashing into a crowded sports stadium, a large meteor impact or even the Sun going supernova.
Your analogy on the weatherman's predictions is spot on. I love it when they tell me there is a "chance" of showers - and I had to stop mowing because it is raining cats and dogs. Still . . . if the sky is dark and the lawn needs mowed, I am going to start the mower instead of waiting to see, if the weatherman was right - or wrong - again. Of course, I am trying to mow my yard and not factoring in the height of the grass in the parking lot in Iran. You know . . . here and now.
6 -
Wow! I think I will use that 100 story building analogy. I really like it. Seriously.BobJudy said:
I agree with your outlook and was trying to point out the futility of using predictions (modeling) before all the facts are known. For instance it could be argued that jumping off a 100 story building is no more dangerous than a 1 story roof. If you monitor the 100 story jumper he is doing pretty good for the first 99 floors, so it must be the last 10 feet that is deadly. So just using those observations the fatality rate for 100 or 1 story must be the same. That seems to be the kind of thinking that has gone into a lot of the covid modeling. Like you I react to the current conditions but do temper that with plans for tomorrow based on todays conditions. BobUS Military Guy said:
Using models is what creates fuzzy math. Let's talk about what is happening - not what could happen. I thought that was the point in quoting the current numbers. I used to build models, when I was a child, but have little use for them now.BobJudy said:
Fuzzy math. 4400 cases and 2200 recovered. So far 31 dead. Can you extrapolate that out of the almost 2200 still ill another 31 will die? That would be 1 out of 70 (1.4%) that are infected die. That would also double your death rate for the department to .11%. Not a big difference but shows that the only correct figures will come after this event is over. That is why the models the government are using seem to change daily. I don't have a lot of faith in those models. Kind of like the weatherman - guess enough times and you are bound to be right once in a while. BobUS Military Guy said:I am constantly hearing about the numbers of positive cases, the number of recoveries, and the number of deaths
- but I never hear the base number.
For instance, with 4,400 positives cases stated above, if that is a base of 5,000; that is huge.
However, if the base number is 50,000 (and I have no idea how many New York City Police there are), the number of deaths (percentage) - significantly changes.
It is not that I am too lazy to determine the base number by myself. I just think it should be part of the initial conversation.
I just could not stand the suspense - so I Googled the answer. According to Google there are 55,305 "employees" in the New York City police department. That is .056 percent or approximately one death for every 1,950 people.
Do you know (defining "know" as exchanging Christmas cards or have their cell phone number) 1,950 people?
Have any of those 1,950 people died within the last three - or even two - months?
I am a huge proponent of living in the here and now. If society is going to go with what "might" happen, we just as well throw in the damn up river breaking, a passenger airplane crashing into a crowded sports stadium, a large meteor impact or even the Sun going supernova.
Your analogy on the weatherman's predictions is spot on. I love it when they tell me there is a "chance" of showers - and I had to stop mowing because it is raining cats and dogs. Still . . . if the sky is dark and the lawn needs mowed, I am going to start the mower instead of waiting to see, if the weatherman was right - or wrong - again. Of course, I am trying to mow my yard and not factoring in the height of the grass in the parking lot in Iran. You know . . . here and now.
Yes, live today - but don't do something stupid that might mess up tomorrow . . . even though tomorrow is not guaranteed.0 -
The way NYC and PA has been cooking the numbers stats and models are only as good as the numbers used. NYC and PA are cooking numbers to get more federal dollars; all of their stats and numbers are suspect. NYC has about 56,000 officers. If they take death rates of 55,000 people during normal times and see the difference between that number and the number now dying that test positive for China Virus we could get closer to the actual mortality rate of Covid across the police force. 3 -
well 50,000 deaths in the u.s. so far (+-), thats just about how many were killed in traffic deaths last year. 0 -
I wonder how many homeless, junkies are killed off to puff up the numbers as "COVID" victims? Yeah that's a 9mm COVID that dude died of. COVID19 will be known as gentrification virus before it gets to leave the lime light. 0 -
MIKE WISKEY: 31539052495899/comments/31539067570331
well 50,000 deaths in the u.s. so far (+-), thats just about how many were killed in traffic deaths last year.The problem with that analogy is that we are only 4 months into the year. With this virus only really gaining traction in the last two months. 60,000 deaths in two months still exceed the 50,000 in a year scenario.
Just sayin'.
0 -
NJ is #2 on cooking the numbers to crooked cuomo's rat hole of NY.bpost said:The way NYC and PA has been cooking the numbers stats and models are only as good as the numbers used. NYC and PA are cooking numbers to get more federal dollars; all of their stats and numbers are suspect. NYC has about 56,000 officers. If they take death rates of 55,000 people during normal times and see the difference between that number and the number now dying that test positive for China Virus we could get closer to the actual mortality rate of Covid across the police force.
The d-rats want you to bail out their decades long underfunded and mismanaged pension funds because of the "virus"
The BOHICA in these ruined dumps WILL be painful. The rats want the whole nation to pay for their d-rat malfeasance and corruption.
But only taxPAYERS will pay. Not the d-rats check suckers.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
11 comments