Current Events > Florida forced to reveal true COVID numbers, higher than they pretended

(+) Yeah! (+)

Cable puttin' in work
---

CableZL posted...

The data shows there is no causation because causation means more X causes more Y.

If more X = more Y, then a situation where more = X less Y cannot happen. This is basic logic.

It is like arguing in circles. For most of the data, more X does equal more Y and less X does equal less Y. That is why there is a noticeable correlation on the data, overall and not just in certain segments. There are some segments where this does not hold true but that does not prove no causation at all, that proves the existence of other variables.

To sit here and look at this limited data and say with certainty there is no causation at all makes very little sense. If there was no noticeble correlation, meaning the correlation coefficient is close to 0, that would be a conclusion you could draw.

---

abaddon41_80 posted...

From a purely statistical standpoint, no causation or lack of causation can be inferred from the data. The only thing we can infer from this limited data is a correlation.
I

So now your argument is that you cannot determine whether there is causation from the data.

So in this ONE TOPIC, you have argued:

1) An increase in new tests per day causes an increase in new cases per day
2) An increase in new tests per day does not cause an increase in new cases per day, just an increase in total new cases
3) You cannot determine whether an increase in new tests per day causes an increase in new cases per day.

So again, you need to make up your mind before this discussion continues.

---

abaddon41_80 posted...

It is like arguing in circles

You're changing your argument repeatedly, so it's more like zigzags.

We have:

1) A positive relationship between X and Y
2) A negative relationship between X and Y
3) No relationsihp between X and Y

Therefore, more X does not cause more Y. More X has happened at the same time as more Y. More X has happened at the same time as less Y. More X has happened at the same time as no significant change in the Y value. Therefore having more X does not cause more Y. If more X caused more Y, more X would never happen at the same time as less Y.

Basic logic.

---

I haven't changed my argument one time. The data shows a correlation between the increased testing and the increase in positive tests per day, that is a fact. There is definitely a noticeable correlation simply between those two numbers.

I have not once said that the increased testing is the absolute and only cause for the increase in positive tests per day. I believe that it is one of the causes, yes, but that is simply my belief. I am not trying to pass it off as a fact. I also believe there are plenty of other factors involved.

You, on the other hand, are trying to pass off your belief that increased testing could not possibly be a cause at all for the increase in cases per day. You are trying to use the data to support that belief but the data doesn't support that belief. The data, taken 100% by itself and not looking at any other factors, actually supports the opposite beliefe.

---

CableZL just proved my point yet again. Kept asking over and over for the evidence and then moved on to something else when it was given. That is why there is no point taking that side seriously. They aren't out for truth, they just want to push an agenda and run away from reality.

---

CableZL posted...

You're changing your argument repeatedly, so it's more like zigzags.

We have:

1) A positive relationship between X and Y
2) A negative relationship between X and Y
3) No relationsihp between X and Y

Therefore, more X does not cause more Y. More X has happened at the same time as more Y. More X has happened at the same time as less Y. More X has happened at the same time as no significant change in the Y value. Therefore having more X does not cause more Y. If more X caused more Y, more X would never happen at the same time as less Y.

Basic logic.

That is the problem here. That is not basic logic. That is bad statistics. Because there are outside factors, the relationship is not always going to remain constant. That is the point of scatterplots and correlation coefficients, in order to get some idea of the relationship between two variables when the relationship was not constant. If the relationship was always constant, there wouldn't be a scatterplot and a correlation coefficient. A constant relationship is a line graph.

---

CableZL posted...

Just from a common sense perspective, it's pretty nonsensical to claim testing more causes more cases in the first place.

yet when people bring up how poorly Cuomo has handled NY, your side says "of course they have more cases, they have tested more". In fact, hilariously daynlokki claimed that NY has way more DEATHS that Florida because Florida hasn't tested as many people. Like testing live people affects the death toll. lol.

---

abaddon41_80 posted...

I haven't changed my argument one time.

https://i.imgur.com/fxoB0Fb.gif

Argument #1: You should expect an increase in positive tests if there is an increase in testing (data proves this is false)
abaddon41_80 posted...

That increase in positive tests is expected given the increase in testing

Argument 2: You are NOT arguing that an increase in tests causes an increase positive tests per day. You're arguing that total infections are increasing with increased testing. This is obvious and no one ever argued against this. Meaningless statement.
abaddon41_80 posted...

I am not saying infection rate/infections per day, what you are referring to as the new case count, is increasing with increased testing. I am saying that total infections are increasing with increased testing, which is an obvious fact.

Argument 3: You cannot determine whether there is causation or not from the data we have seen. You can only infer correlation (You can, because basic logic says that if more X = more Y, then you cannot have less Y with more X.)
abaddon41_80 posted...

From a purely statistical standpoint, no causation or lack of causation can be inferred from the data. The only thing we can infer from this limited data is a correlation.

---

guesswho33 posted...

yet when people bring up how poorly Cuomo has handled NY, your side says "of course they have more cases, they have tested more". In fact, hilariously daynlokki claimed that NY has way more DEATHS that Florida because Florida hasn't tested as many people. Like testing live people affects the death toll. lol.

Uhh no, that isn't my argument at all in regard to NY. The nation as a whole has handled it poorly, but there are a handful of reasons why the virus hit New York so hard.

---

abaddon41_80 posted...

That is the problem here. That is not basic logic. That is bad statistics. Because there are outside factors, the relationship is not always going to remain constant. That is the point of scatterplots and correlation coefficients, in order to get some idea of the relationship between two variables when the relationship was not constant. If the relationship was always constant, there wouldn't be a scatterplot and a correlation coefficient. A constant relationship is a line graph.

And for the 3rd or 4th time, the "outside factor" is the value of what % of the people taking the tests are actually infected.

However, from a purely common sense standpoint, a test for a virus does not cause a virus, so doing more testing for said virus (daily testing) does not cause more people to be infected with said virus (positive cases).

The relationship between new tests and new cases hinges purely upon what percentage of people taking the tests are infected. If more people are infected at the time you're doing testing, you're going to get more positive cases. If less people are infected at the time you're doing testing, you'll get less positive cases.

---

CableZL posted...

Uhh no, that isn't my argument at all in regard to NY. The nation as a whole has handled it poorly, but there are a handful of reasons why the virus hit New York so hard.

With reason number one being Cuomo is bad. Also the country as a whole ahs not handled it poorly. Apparently you don't comprehend that most countries have it bad. It's all China's fault and O's for not replenishing supplies.

---

guesswho33 posted...

With reason number one being Cuomo is bad. Also the country as a whole ahs not handled it poorly. Apparently you don't comprehend that most countries have it bad. It's all China's fault and O's for not replenishing supplies.

Uhh yes, the country as a whole has handled it poorly.

1) Trump has been in office for 3 years and didn't replenish supplies.
2) Trump disbanded the US pandemic response team Obama set up to better predict and contain the spread of viruses like this.
3) Trump repeatedly ignored advice from the CDC and other health experts on how to handle the pandemic.
4) Trump repeatedly downplayed the severity of the pandemic.
5) Trump has repeatedly put incompetent and unqualified people in charge of handling the pandemic response.
6) Trump repeatedly complimented China on how they were handling the virus early on.

---

I am not going to continue arguing with you about the statistics because it is clear you do not understand the point of statistics is to try to apply actual numerical values to things but that it is impossible to do it perfectly.

CableZL posted...

The relationship between new tests and new cases hinges purely upon what percentage of people taking the tests are infected. If more people are infected at the time you're doing testing, you're going to get more positive cases. If less people are infected at the time you're doing testing, you'll get less positive cases.

This gets to the root of this entire topic. Do you believe that Florida's response to COVID-19 is going to cause it to spread faster?

---

abaddon41_80 posted...

I am not going to continue arguing with you about the statistics because it is clear you do not understand the point of statistics is to try to apply actual numerical values to things but that it is impossible to do it perfectly.

Good because you're literally trying to argue that a test for a virus causes a virus. Or maybe you aren't because you can't seem to decide what you're actually arguing.

abaddon41_80 posted...

This gets to the root of this entire topic. Do you believe that Florida's response to COVID-19 is going to cause it to spread faster?

I think people refusing to quarantine and follow social distancing guidelines in Florida and everywhere else are going to cause the virus to spread faster.

Examples:

1)
Wiconsin bar right after the state supreme court lifted the stay at home order:
https://i.imgur.com/3tcG6jf.jpg

2)
Ocean City Maryland after the stay at home order ended:
https://i.imgur.com/DjOSXU8.jpg

3)
That Holy Ghost Church in Houston having in-person service as soon as they're legally allowed to, causing multiple members to get COVID-19, and likely causing the death of the priest

It's not just Florida. It's people all over the place acting like it's over when it isn't.

---

CableZL posted...

I think people refusing to quarantine and follow social distancing guidelines in Florida and everywhere else are going to cause the virus to spread faster.

Examples:

1)
Wiconsin bar right after the state supreme court lifted the stay at home order:
https://i.imgur.com/3tcG6jf.jpg (click to expand)

2)
Ocean City Maryland after the stay at home order ended:
https://i.imgur.com/DjOSXU8.jpg

3)
That Holy Ghost Church in Houston having in-person service as soon as they're legally allowed to, causing multiple members to get COVID-19, and likely causing the death of the priest

It's not just Florida. It's people all over the place acting like it's over when it isn't.

None of this proves the virus is spreading any faster. The daily new cases in the US have had a downward trend since the beginning of May, when some states started easing restrictions. There have been spikes here and there, such as yesterday, but the overall trend had been downward.

---

shockthemonkey posted...

lmfao this sounds like parody

bro check his post history, it is actually fucking wild

---

abaddon41_80 posted...

None of this proves the virus is spreading any faster. The daily new cases in the US have had a downward trend since the beginning of May, when some states started easing restrictions.

Dude... I never said those examples prove the virus is spreading faster. However, at this point it's pretty safe to say that large gatherings like that where people aren't wearing masks or practicing social distancing will cause the virus to spread faster.

The daily new cases in the US have had a downward trend overall because the hardest hit areas are in a downward trend. That doesn't mean it's trending downward everywhere in the US.

Texas is trending upward.
Florida is trending upward.
Louisiana is trending upward.
Illinois is trending upward.
Mississippi is trending upward.


---

I literally said "I think X is going to happen because of Y, and here are 3 examples."

Then you try to counter that by saying "THAT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING."

This discussion is beyond tiring now.

---

I think you both should have a long look in the mirror considering you argued about this for over 6 hours.

---

NightMarishPie posted...

I think you both should have a long look in the mirror considering you argued about this for over 6 hours.

Bro... I don't have anything else to do. Slow day at work. Working from home. I'm not going to risk going out and doing something until this actually starts dying down in Texas.

I'm a network engineer and all changes have been frozen because of the memorial day weekend, so I literally can't do anything.

---

CableZL posted...

Bro... I don't have anything else to do. Slow day at work. Working from home. I'm not going to risk going out and doing something until this actually starts dying down in Texas.

I'm a network engineer and all changes have been frozen because of the memorial day weekend, so I literally can't do anything.

Bars just opened up today at 25% capacity. Go have a drink!
---

CableZL posted...

Uhh yes, the country as a whole has handled it poorly.

1) Trump has been in office for 3 years and didn't replenish supplies.
2) Trump disbanded the US pandemic response team Obama set up to better predict and contain the spread of viruses like this.
3) Trump repeatedly ignored advice from the CDC and other health experts on how to handle the pandemic.
4) Trump repeatedly downplayed the severity of the pandemic.
5) Trump has repeatedly put incompetent and unqualified people in charge of handling the pandemic response.
6) Trump repeatedly complimented China on how they were handling the virus early on.

lol. He ignored that same CDC who said the virus easily spreads from surfaces, only to now say it doesn't? Seems smart to me that he isn't assuming everything they think is fact. Also Fauci said no need to wear masks and you could still go on cruises. Obviously Trump is as close to an expert as those have been shown to be.

When trump did talk about the pandemic for the first time, the dems said he was just trying to distract from the (bogus) impeachment hearings. They said banning travel was wrong, Biden said he would not have done it, and they said to go to restaurants.

Trump was busy fixing the boatload of disasters O left him with. You can't fix everything in one day. He clearly could not have been reasonably expected to know how bad O left the situation after W had been working hard to prepare for a pandemic and the left laughed at W for it. That's after Clinton caused the 2001 events.

What trump said about China EARLY ON is irrelevant. Do you even pay attention to anything? He is talking bad about hem now AFTER it has been REALIZED by people china delayed telling people. He didn't know that back then, genius.

All of your claims are ridiculous because 1. they don't change that other countries have it just as bad and 2. I just proved that the dems downplayed it, had no plan in place, mocked him for him taking it seriously, etc... Nice try, though.

---

guesswho33 posted...

yet when people bring up how poorly Cuomo has handled NY, your side says "of course they have more cases, they have tested more". In fact, hilariously daynlokki claimed that NY has way more DEATHS that Florida because Florida hasn't tested as many people. Like testing live people affects the death toll. lol.

Well it does when you dont test ANY dead people. Think about this. Only people who have tested positive for Covid in Florida can count as covid deaths (they need to test positive of course). So if you arent testing people, and those untested people are dying, not one of them will be considered a covid case because there is no positive test, not because everyone one of these people dont have covid. People are dying at home from pneumonia (which covid causes), while having other covid symptoms and being told to shelter in place by a physician, but because they were never tested these are not considered covid deaths. So yes, under testing of covid itself will lead to an undercount of deaths. Thats common sense math.

guesswho33 posted...

garbage

itstimetostopposting.jpg
---

daynlokki posted...

Well it does when you dont test ANY dead people. Think about this. Only people who have tested positive for Covid in Florida can count as covid deaths (they need to test positive of course). So if you arent testing people, and those untested people are dying, not one of them will be considered a covid case because there is no positive test, not because everyone one of these people dont have covid. People are dying at home from pneumonia (which covid causes), while having other covid symptoms and being told to shelter in place by a physician, but because they were never tested these are not considered covid deaths. So yes, under testing of covid itself will lead to an undercount of deaths. Thats common sense math.

Keeo telling yourself that NY has so many cases becuase of more tests done. lol. You're literally the only person on the planet to think that florida has as many deaths as them. That's literally tin foil hat level of conspiracy theory.

---

I've been at the office since 10:00 with very little to do, most of my regular customers are closed and the only call ins I get are for people asking for PPE, which I do not currently have. I have nothing better to do until I leave at 7:30.

CableZL posted...

Dude... I never said those examples prove the virus is spreading faster. However, at this point it's pretty safe to say that large gatherings like that where people aren't wearing masks or practicing social distancing will cause the virus to spread faster.

That is the point, the data does not show that is a safe assumption. Sweden, who never really implemented any type of guidelines, has had pretty much a straight line for new cases per day since April, for example. At no point has their rate of infection increased in any significant way.

Look at the graphs. On May 1st, Florida had 1037 new confirmed infections. The highest that number has gotten, per this data, in May is 1204 as of yesterday. That is a very slight and not at all statistically significant increase, especially when you consider most days in May have been below 1000. That is why the NY Times lists Florida under the "new cases mostly the same" header.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html

The NY Times also lists Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi in that group. The NY Times actually has Illinois trending downward.

There is no statistical evidence for relaxing social distancing rules leading to more confirmed infections and/or a faster rate of infection. That is simply your belief and you are trying to use data to support it, but the data actually supports the other end of the argument.

---

abaddon41_80 posted...

There is no statistical evidence for relaxing social distancing rules leading to more confirmed infections. That is simply your belief and it is a belief without any real support.

It's not the relaxation of the rules that would lead to more infections. It's the people not doing it.

The main problem is that you can be asymptomatic and still spread the virus, so large groups of people not following social distancing guidelines is probably going to result in more infections.


---

Clearly this is just a smokescreen since this is a hoax and the real numbers are much lower than the original under reported numbers.

---

CableZL posted...

It's not the relaxation of the rules that would lead to more infections. It's the people not doing it.

The main problem is that you can be asymptomatic and still spread the virus, so large groups of people not following social distancing guidelines is probably going to result in more infections.

It is okay to have the hypothesis that people not following social distancing guidelines is probably going to result in a higher infection rate but, so far, the data does not seem to support that hypothesis. We won't really know if relaxed social distancing led to a higher infection rate for another month, at least. Even if there is an increase in the infection rate, which I do not believe there will be, we will not be able directly attribute that as the cause.

---

guesswho33 posted...

Keeo telling yourself that NY has so many cases becuase of more tests done. lol. You're literally the only person on the planet to think that florida has as many deaths as them. That's literally tin foil hat level of conspiracy theory.

So you arent believing that more people are infected than have been testing? So you honestly think only 1.5m of our 330m in population have covid currently?

abaddon41_80 posted...

It is okay to have the hypothesis that people not following social distancing guidelines is probably going to result in a higher infection rate but, so far, the data does not seem to support that hypothesis. We won't really know if relaxed social distancing led to a higher infection rate for another month, at least. Even if there is an increase in the infection rate, which I do not believe there will be, we will not be able directly attribute that as the cause.

The data doesnt support that because the states controlling the data arent reporting truthfully. The data didnt support human to human transmission per the WHO at the beginning of this, probably because China had the only data, much like the states control their own.

It's really a waste of time believing so-called "experts" at this point. Notice now they say the peak of the virus will be November. lol. this after they kept saying May, then June. They clearly don't know anything and just guess, wrong more often than weather reports.

---

guesswho33 posted...

It's really a waste of time believing so-called "experts" at this point. Notice now they say the peak of the virus will be November. lol. this after they kept saying May, then June. They clearly don't know anything and just guess, wrong more often than weather reports.

The models they're using assume people actually follow social distancing and quarantine guidelines.

---

guesswho33 posted...

It's really a waste of time believing so-called "experts" at this point. Notice now they say the peak of the virus will be November. lol. this after they kept saying May, then June. They clearly don't know anything and just guess, wrong more often than weather reports.

So you are saying we shouldn't trust Trump?

Ruvan22 posted...

So you are saying we shouldn't trust Trump?

That goes without saying

Ruvan22 posted...

So you are saying we shouldn't trust Trump?

Trump does not run the models or have anything to do with this.

---

guesswho33 posted...

Trump does not run the models or have anything to do with this.

Trump is an idiot too, don't forget that

guesswho33 posted...

It's really a waste of time believing so-called "experts" at this point. Notice now they say the peak of the virus will be November. lol. this after they kept saying May, then June. They clearly don't know anything and just guess, wrong more often than weather reports.

Well the actual peak of most major pandemics is after the SECOND spike. First round with the Spanish flu killed about 5m worldwide. 2nd go round killed 50m.

daynlokki posted...

Well the actual peak of most major pandemics is after the SECOND spike. First round with the Spanish flu killed about 5m worldwide. 2nd go round killed 50m.

Donald "Fucking Moron" Trump says we're not going to close down when we get a second wave.

Trump shat the bed, now he has to live in it. Literally, he changed his residence to Florida.

---

lol. No he didn't. He has handled it masterfully.

---

guesswho33 posted...

He has handled it masterfully

Said no one of value, ever. Jesus Christ, how hard do you have to slurp the man to think he did any better than terrible. He downplayed and covered up the severity of the virus for over 2 months because he was afraid of it affecting his reelection campaign.

lol. Nice job reversing reality. The left is who kept saying to go to restaurants, go on cruises, live your lives AFTER trump already started talking about the pandemic. Also, the virus staying around helps him, not hurt him, because nobody with any sanity votes in a new leader in the middle of a pandemic. It would make there be extra deaths, due to the new pres having to be briefed and figure out strategies.

---

guesswho33 posted...

Nice job reversing reality

You really are delusional. Here's your idiot leader, the moron was calling it a Democrat hoax while everyone was saying we have a serious problem:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1237027356314869761

Nice changing of the subject. The left was downplaying it after he took steps. Fact.

---

guesswho33 posted...

The left was downplaying it after he took steps.

No they weren't. Fake news.

guesswho33 posted...

Nice changing of the subject. The left was downplaying it after he took steps. Fact.

You mean like restricting travel from China, unless you were American? Like how it was an American returning from China that introduced Covid 19 to America?

---