What if the lockdown was all a big mistake?

[der Teufel]

The CDC statistics don't necessarily include the TOTAL population of the United States.

They state "A mortality rate is a measure of the frequency of occurrence of death in a defined population during a specified interval."
— Emphasis added

In this case I believe the "defined population" would be, as TAM noted, those who had experienced the disease.

[Vol Texan]

Just remember: 76.43% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[parabelum]

Just remember: 76.43% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

And that’s 90.32% accurate out of 30.41% random samples over 100.00% of the test studies of 17.93% of population.

[jason812]

Or they can just use their numbers and treat them as imaginary (they sort of are anyways), square them and voilà now they are negative.

Do they still teach that in schools?

[Vol Texan]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

[Rafe]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

And...where are the goshdarned masks? Anybody paying attention will note that she didn't start wearing a mask in her daily self-promotion press conferences until the day before yesterday. If it's sooo important that you want to fine us $1,000 for not wearing a mask, then why haven't you been wearing one?

[Grayling813]

via Imgflip Meme Generator

And...where are the goshdarned masks? Anybody paying attention will note that she didn't start wearing a mask in her daily self-promotion press conferences until the day before yesterday. If it's sooo important that you want to fine us $1,000 for not wearing a mask, then why haven't you been wearing one?

Wonder how she’d feel if a few thousand masked Texans showed up at her residence to protest her unconstitutional actions?

[TreyHouston]

The CDC statistics don't necessarily include the TOTAL population of the United States.

They state "A mortality rate is a measure of the frequency of occurrence of death in a defined population during a specified interval."
— Emphasis added

In this case I believe the "defined population" would be, as TAM noted, those who had experienced the disease.

No, thats the -Proportionate mortality-

Did you read the CDC link?

https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/ ... tion3.html

[SQLGeek]

What if the lockdown was all a big mistake?

The problem with hindsight on this is that if the lockdown worked, we won't really know. Sure educated guesses and predictions can be made but I think it's hard to truly prove out with data. Looking at other parts of the world with less stringent measures such as Sweden might be instructive but it's not necessarily a like to like comparison.

I'm not saying it hasn't been a mistake, I just don't think there's a way to truly know.

[03Lightningrocks]

What if the lockdown was all a big mistake?

The problem with hindsight on this is that if the lockdown worked, we won't really know. Sure educated guesses and predictions can be made but I think it's hard to truly prove out with data. Looking at other parts of the world with less stringent measures such as Sweden might be instructive but it's not necessarily a like to like comparison.

I'm not saying it hasn't been a mistake, I just don't think there's a way to truly know.

Being an American, I don't feel it matters if it worked or not. It is huge violation of our constitutional rights. There are certain inherent risks in America being the land of the free and the home of the brave. Sacrificing our freedoms in the name of feeling safe is something our fore fathers would not have even considered.

[srothstein]

The CDC statistics don't necessarily include the TOTAL population of the United States.

They state "A mortality rate is a measure of the frequency of occurrence of death in a defined population during a specified interval."
— Emphasis added

In this case I believe the "defined population" would be, as TAM noted, those who had experienced the disease.

No, thats the -Proportionate mortality-

Did you read the CDC link?

https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/ ... tion3.html

I think part of the problem is that different statistics show different things. CDC is trying to clarify what they mean in each case. We are using English to describe mathematical concepts and it is not as precise.

If I want to know how deadly a disease is to people who caught it, I use the fatality from it number divided by the people diagnosed with it number. If I want to know how deadly a disease is to the population overall, I use the fatality from it number over the population overall number. But these indicate two different things. The fatality rate of a disease to the people who did not catch it is meaningless because they cannot die from it.

I think that most people are talking about the death rate from the disease to who caught it when they talk about how fatal it is. That is how I generally look at it. I know the CDC sometimes uses the death rate to the population for certain things, because it makes it sound more serious. For example, to show that we all need to lose weight and workout more, they will say that the death rate from heart disease and diabetes combined is XX% of the population. Obviously, the implication is that if you get in better shape, you may not develop diabetes or heart disease and may improve your chances of living a little longer.

But I really don't think this is a point worth getting upset over. We just have to agree on which death rate we are talking about. For specific diseases, such as COVID-19, I generally talk about the percentage of people diagnosed with it who die.

[Rafe]

Not unexpectedly, Harris County Judge Hidalgo has been sued over yesterday's mandatory face mask order. Per the Houston Chronicle article linked below:

Hotze...said in a petition filed in state district court that the mask rule is at odds with a provision of the Constitution that gives the Legislature "exclusive authority to define crimes and to designate the punishments for those crimes." The petition also contends that Hidalgo cannot issue more restrictive orders than Abbott, who has not mandated that Texans wear masks in public.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/h ... 221364.php

[srothstein]

Not unexpectedly, Harris County Judge Hidalgo has been sued over yesterday's mandatory face mask order. Per the Houston Chronicle article linked below:

Hotze...said in a petition filed in state district court that the mask rule is at odds with a provision of the Constitution that gives the Legislature "exclusive authority to define crimes and to designate the punishments for those crimes." The petition also contends that Hidalgo cannot issue more restrictive orders than Abbott, who has not mandated that Texans wear masks in public.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/h ... 221364.php

On the first point they will lose. The legislature defined the crime. I did find that in chapter 418 when I read the code.

[John Galt]

What do you mean "if"?

Exactly!

[Rafe]

Not unexpectedly, Harris County Judge Hidalgo has been sued over yesterday's mandatory face mask order. Per the Houston Chronicle article linked below:

Hotze...said in a petition filed in state district court that the mask rule is at odds with a provision of the Constitution that gives the Legislature "exclusive authority to define crimes and to designate the punishments for those crimes." The petition also contends that Hidalgo cannot issue more restrictive orders than Abbott, who has not mandated that Texans wear masks in public.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/h ... 221364.php

On the first point they will lose. The legislature defined the crime. I did find that in chapter 418 when I read the code.

Way above my pay grade, but I did see something odd that I can't explain. Seems the local government jurisdiction is pretty much spelled out in GC 418.108, and I guess items (f) and (g) apply here, with (g) including language that pretty much mirrors 418.018: "The county judge or the mayor of a municipality may control ingress to and egress from a disaster area under the jurisdiction and authority of the county judge or mayor and control the movement of persons and the occupancy of premises in that area." I guess "control the movement of persons" includes how they can move, as in I suppose even if they must be wearing CDC-approved hazmat suits and clown shoes.

Probably not applicable, but what's odd is 418.108(i): "A declaration under this section may include a restriction that exceeds a restriction authorized by Section 352.051, Local Government Code." And it goes on to say that the exceeding restriction can last for only 60 hours unless an extension is granted by the governor. What's odd is that LGC Chapter 352 is "County Fire Protection" and 352.051 is "Regulation of Restricted Fireworks." Neither the word disaster or governor is mentioned in LGC 352 anywhere and the word emergency only 12 times, none related to anything resembling a disaster declaration and not in 352.051.

At least I don't think I'm reading it wrong. I'm looking at https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs ... GV.418.htm and https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs ... LG.352.htm. Is this an error in GC 418 or just another one of those legal-language oddities? I know it doesn't mean anything in the topic context, but why would a 60-hour extension of local fireworks regulations be put expressly in 418.108 and require approval by the governor to go beyond 60 hours? I mean, LGC 352.051 already includes "the commissioners court of the county by order may prohibit or restrict the sale or use of restricted fireworks in the unincorporated area of the county" so it's a bit baffling why the sale or use of "skyrockets with sticks" and "missiles with fins" would be something to be called out in statutes related to the declaration of local disasters. Just another bit of the code that keeps me