[semantic]

It's easy to (re)create any set of graph results you want - ranging from "hair on fire!", "OK same old same old", to "yawn, that's it?", based on differing assumptions.

Here's an example of different mortality projections over a 90 day period starting from the first recorded US covid death (2/28 - 5/28). Depending on different growth rate assumptions, the low range is 50k, middle is 500k (10x low), high is 3.3m (1% US pop):

I hope people realize you can literally project/estimate anything you want to set/support an agenda/narrative. That's why the most prescient observation was made by wastoute, who suggested just focusing on actual reported deaths.

With actual hard data, we can look back at actual growth rates, (hopefully) make reasonable assumptions out the next 7 days. (Or, even better, compare potential future to other countries 7-10 days ahead of US). After that, all we can really do is wait, watch and anticipate when the eventual peak/plateau is hit.

PS Again, send me a PM and I can send you a link to the different models if you want to play, test, etc.

[wastoute]

I sent Nathan Bedford the graph I shared with you yesterday. I hope he can figure out how to post it soon because it answers so many questions.

[going hot]

I hope people realize you can literally project/estimate anything you want to set/support an agenda/narrative.

Soaked that into by brain some 45 years ago.

Also why a fired bullet does not fly indefinitely.

[Travis McGee]

[LS]

Exactly right. I don’t know “wasteout,” but he/she is right. ALL that’s important are the deaths per infection, and ours are extremely low-—especially if (as many think) this China Virus was here in mid-December without ANY noticeable spike in deaths.