Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Sunnely
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 74 next>>
May 7, 2020 11:38:40   #
Salomj9850 wrote:
I'm from N.Y. and the images almost made me cry.


Really sad. I'm sure the whole nation and the world feel your pain.

This too shall pass.

Thanks for watching.
Go to
May 7, 2020 11:36:36   #
mr spock wrote:
Truly Haunting


Yep! Is anybody out there?

Thanks for watching.
Go to
May 7, 2020 11:35:25   #
tiphareth51 wrote:
Wow....amazing! What a stark comparison to the normal hustle and bustle of the
'big apple'.


Eerie, isn't it? What if a band of aliens from outer space mistakenly land in NY? There's not a single earthling for them to ask for direction.

Thanks for watching.
Go to
May 7, 2020 11:27:31   #
berchman wrote:
Pretty disturbing to a former New Yorker.


Indeed.

I am not from NY but I consider it my second home as my immediate family live in NY and NJ. Unfortunately, my planned visit this month with them was derailed by the virus. Sadly, my sister-in-law (NJ) succumbed to the virus a week ago.
Go to
May 7, 2020 11:18:54   #
Fotoartist wrote:
Monochrome works better than color in this case.


Agree.

Monochrome depicts a somber mood; mourning.

But, Americans are brave and resilient. Tried and tested, we will bounce back in no time.

Thanks for watching.
Go to
May 7, 2020 01:35:34   #
See Italians' resilience - under quarantine, under the lens, in monochromatic stills.
5:45 in HD.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8qUTd42p8E
Go to
May 4, 2020 10:50:39   #
Under the lens, under lockdown. . .
. . .captured in monochromatic images
3:25 in HD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc9_kn84ojc
Go to
May 1, 2020 20:58:38   #
The Streets of Paris: Under the Lights, Under the Lens, Under Quarantine
B&W 3:00 minutes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uf4CRP0bGlY
Go to
Apr 28, 2020 17:56:29   #
If there is one positive aspect of the coronavirus, it brought out the artistic and emotional side in man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBZJn2l5ExA
Go to
Apr 22, 2020 17:12:54   #
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzYgpJZ_VWI
Go to
Apr 14, 2020 14:21:41   #
yssirk123 wrote:
Wouldn't a true and meaningful fatality rate be calculated by # of deaths (numerator) / number of contracted cases (denominator)?

We know the numerator, but due to inadequate testing results we don't know the actual denominator. Absent that information, it seems any published fatality rate must involve a series of assumptions.


Exactly! The true or close to the real case fatality rate is to test everyone for covid and count the number of positives - confirmatory diagnosis (denominator) and number of deaths directly caused by covid (numerator), both done for same given period of time (e.g., March 1 - 31) then multiply the result by 100.

It's very unlikely everyone in the US will be tested (320 M population) due to logistic reason and civil liberty (denominator). As for the diagnosis - will the death be automatically attributed directly to covid just because the patient was confirmed positive for covid testing and the underlying chronic medical conditions relegated only as contributing factors even though the patient had a serious heart condition, bad diabetes, emphysema, kidney disease alone or in combination before contracting covid? (numerator).

Sometimes the number of cases and deaths can be fudged, too. In early Feb. 2020, due to shortage of test kits, China included diagnosis for covid if the patient's CT scan or MRI with findings of pneumonia even though the patient has not been tested for covid plus those confirmed by lab testing. The number of covid diagnosis and deaths exploded upward and after 1 week, they reverted back to the diagnosis of covid only if testing is positive. Doing so affected the case fatality rate.

Bottom line is, you go with the numbers you have but bear in mind, numbers may not be accurate.
Go to
Apr 13, 2020 18:08:29   #
Rongnongno wrote:
Yet you are.


You are the one who posted fruits and orchards. You digressed. I stick to the subject of discussion.

This not not going anywhere. I will let you have the last word.
Go to
Apr 13, 2020 18:04:57   #
Rongnongno wrote:
No one even hinted as this being final, far from it. Everyone agrees that this hides a mountain of data.

And I know how to calculate a percentage, thank you.


Good for you.
Go to
Apr 13, 2020 18:03:09   #
Sorry, I can't compare apples and bananas.
Go to
Apr 13, 2020 17:52:44   #
Rongnongno wrote:
So you agree not to be concerned of what is unknown?

This is the sum of it.

I refuse to be either scared or releived by what I do not know. I cannot discount it but at the same time I cannot use that to make any 'informed' decision. If we did that we would stop living, too scared or too optimistic about a good outcome.

When I see the optimistic statistics or rumors spread by the same folks I start questioning them, not accept them. Call me paranoid if you want but as long as thing is around we know nothing.

When this is 'over' (as there is a vaccine) we will be able to figure something. Even then we will have less that 'perfect' way to gauge the true personal impact health wise.

Once mentioned before (another thread) coroners are the first on line to determine the cause or contributing factor of death. They are currently raising the alarm that not having anyway to test the deads they cannot report anything. If they are allowed to take swabs and test later we may have a truer picture.

In the mean time? We can only rely on what is reported, not on innuendoes and rumors. Not ONE scientist has come up with any number on what is really going on. Once they do, we will have a truer picture.

In the mean time? Sorry, no cigar - it can give you cancer if you smoke so... But then again how many who smoked have died and how many have survived w/o being recorded? Do you know? I do not. Same issue just 'man made' this time.

This goes into 'What have you got to risk?' (asked in many situations). When one asks that question there is a strong hint of desperation.
So you agree not to be concerned of what is unknow... (show quote)



As to your question, "So you agree not to be concerned of what is unknown?" That's beside the point. How I feel about the numbers you posted is irrelevant. It's not going to change the numbers for the better of worse. As they say, it is what it is.

But for the sake of discussion, allow me to express how I feel about the numbers you posted. I am worried and concerned. Worried for myself but most especially, worried and concerned for my immediate family who all reside in the the top 2 hot spots in the US - NY and NJ. I am concerned and worried for them (sister, brother and cousins) because they are all in their 60s and 70s with underlying medical conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, heart condition, and cancer (immune suppressed). I am worried and concerned for myself because I belong in the age-group category with high risk of fatality and with a couple of underlying medical conditions. I am also worried and concerned for all Americans because of a lot of unknowns with this virus, its high degree of contagiousness, and the lack of vaccine and approved treatment at present.

To reiterate what I said, the numbers you posted are preliminary. This is an evolving outbreak and coronavirus is not done yet. These numbers are moving target. For example, the case fatality rate you arrive with the numbers you posted today, most probably will move downward when this outbreak is over. For example, during the Wuhan outbreak, the case fatality rate reported by China (if you believe the numbers they're spewing out) was in the range of 2-3%. The current estimated case fatality rate is much lower between 1 to 2% or even lower. I am pretty sure when this things is over, the CFR will be even lower.

CFR = Number of deaths from a disease for a period of time (e.g., 30 days) divided by the number of confirmed cases for the same disease for the same given period of time (30 days) multiply by 100.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 74 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.