ObiOne Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 65,564 tests yesterday and 584 positive cases. Something isn't right with that. Are they using different testing methods? I understand they took a really big hit early on. But if social distancing works, how would the disease have spread to a huge percentage of the population when they were shut down? SO much so that hardly anyone is catching it now...even though they are somewhat reopening? Only southern and red states are still having a problem. I smell a big pile of BS. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObiOne Posted July 10, 2020 Author Share Posted July 10, 2020 https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Map?%3Aembed=yes&%3Atoolbar=no&%3Atabs=n Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monte1076 Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 13 minutes ago, ObiOne said: 65,564 tests yesterday and 584 positive cases. Something isn't right with that. Are they using different testing methods? I understand they took a really big hit early on. But if social distancing works, how would the disease have spread to a huge percentage of the population when they were shut down? So much so that hardly anyone is catching it now....even though they are somewhat reopening? Only southern and red states are still having a problem? I smell a big pile of BS. California is still being hit pretty hard. They're not really a "red" state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 15 minutes ago, ObiOne said: 65,564 tests yesterday and 584 positive cases. Something isn't right with that. Are they using different testing methods? I understand they took a really big hit early on. But if social distancing works, how would the disease have spread to a huge percentage of the population when they were shut down? So much so that hardly anyone is catching it now....even though they are somewhat reopening? Only southern and red states are still having a problem? I smell a big pile of BS. Why did you black out your post so it's hard to read? ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObiOne Posted July 10, 2020 Author Share Posted July 10, 2020 8 minutes ago, Monte1076 said: California is still being hit pretty hard. They're not really a "red" state. I guess they are the outlier. I'm just trying to make sense of these numbers. And they don't make sense. NYC is still one of the most congested cities on earth. Why hardly any new cases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyZuco Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 It comes down to the number of people being tested also. In as state of over 18 million people only 66K were tested yesterday. That's a whopping .4% of the population. that got tested yesterday-- Overall--New York has Tested--4.5 million people--or 24% of the states population 400,000 positive cases total--about 9% of the states TESTED population has tested positive 25,000 have died--About 6% of those that have caught the virus have died from it--as of July 9. 23,678 of those deaths were folks over 50 years old--well 9 had an unknown age. So, 94% of New York's death have happened to the elderly-- Conspiracy thoughts--if those that have lived with freedom all their lives, are dying out, and the indoctrination of the leftist policies are taking over younger minds--why wouldn't the other post about giving up their freedom of speech--really lead to a government take over of the country? LOL https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/ed483ecd702b4298ab01e8b9cafc8b83 In comparison--Texas Total Population--29.9 Million folks Total Tested--2.6 Million Tested=8.6% Total Cases-210,000=8% of those TESTED have gotten the virus Total Deaths-2918=1.3% that tested positive have died from the virus. So Texas is actually testing more people each day, meaning that our number of cases is going to go up. We will need to see what the numbers are when Texas has tested 25% of their population as New York has. Right now, the averages seem to be that less than 10% of the population has the virus--and those that have it, And 94% or more of those that catch it survive it. So why NO DEATH is good--the hysteria that the media has put forth--I don't believe is necessary or truthful. But that is looking at the numbers, myself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 Actual numbers, as of today, 3,215,074 have the Virus. Even with asymptomatic cases we’re probably less than 5%. Most of us (myself included) mentally see an end to this in the near future, but with no vaccine, we’ll be confronting this Virus, for at least, another two years. And it’s going to infect virtually all of us sooner or later. You can run but you can’t hide. You can wear mask, stay home most of the time, but sooner or later, you’re going to get it. Only possible saving grace is that many, for whatever reason, are naturally immune. If anyone thinks I’m wrong, please point out why. I do find this Pandemic depressing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 45 minutes ago, Hagar said: Actual numbers, as of today, 3,215,074 have the Virus. Even with asymptomatic cases we’re probably less than 5%. Most of us (myself included) mentally see an end to this in the near future, but with no vaccine, we’ll be confronting this Virus, for at least, another two years. And it’s going to infect virtually all of us sooner or later. You can run but you can’t hide. You can wear mask, stay home most of the time, but sooner or later, you’re going to get it. Only possible saving grace is that many, for whatever reason, are naturally immune. If anyone thinks I’m wrong, please point out why. I do find this Pandemic depressing. Those are false numbers for those who have the virus, because it doesn't take into account those who have recovered from it. I don't think they should be included in that number as a total now, but as a running total of how many have been effected. The thing is none of us know how long it could last. The Bubonic Plague is still around, and was recently infected a village in ?? Yes, you have that right China. The first pandemic of The Plague lasted for only 2 years. The second lasted for 17 years. The third wave from what I could see from dates lasted for 5 years. We simply don't know, because the "experts" keep changing what they know about the virus. Much of that is because of it has evolved so frequently. That could do one of two things, it could become weaker and obsolete which is what I'm hoping or it could become even stronger due to the overuse of sanitizers and become resistant to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 7 minutes ago, DaveTV1 said: Those are false numbers for those who have the virus, because it doesn't take into account those who have recovered from it. I don't think they should be included in that number as a total now, but as a running total of how many have been effected. The thing is none of us know how long it could last. The Bubonic Plague is still around, and was recently infected a village in ?? Yes, you have that right China. The first pandemic of The Plague lasted for only 2 years. The second lasted for 17 years. The third wave from what I could see from dates lasted for 5 years. We simply don't know, because the "experts" keep changing what they know about the virus. Much of that is because of it has evolved so frequently. That could do one of two things, it could become weaker and obsolete which is what I'm hoping or it could become even stronger due to the overuse of sanitizers and become resistant to them. You’re correct, that is the total number who’ve had, or now have the Virus. One thing I’ve never understood is the number of States who don’t count recovered cases. Under US cases, touch breakdown. https://www.bing.com/search?q=Coronavirus+statistics+in+US&go=Search&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&pq=coronavirus+statistics+in+us&sc=8-28&sk=&cvid=90A95AC1FD7D477FB71DE42EB1BB3134 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 27 minutes ago, Hagar said: You’re correct, that is the total number who’ve had, or now have the Virus. One thing I’ve never understood is the number of States who don’t count recovered cases. Under US cases, touch breakdown. https://www.bing.com/search?q=Coronavirus+statistics+in+US&go=Search&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&pq=coronavirus+statistics+in+us&sc=8-28&sk=&cvid=90A95AC1FD7D477FB71DE42EB1BB3134 I stated that a few weeks ago. I'm hearing that Texas may shut down again, but the death totals don't call for it. I realize they are saying the lack of hospital beds, but why did they tear down or if they did take down the temporary hospital at NRG why isn't it back up ? I would almost bet that it's in a landfill or has been recycled and why it hasn't been done. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 My Dad once knew a man they treated for the yeller jaunders for two years, until they found out he was a Chinaman .... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PepeSilvia Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 5 hours ago, NATUREBOY98 said: Lol you think those numbers are fishy. 1,500,000,000 Chinamen have magically stopped getting the Wu Tang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now