Soaring already DOA for the season???

I just received an email from the New Mexico Pilots Association. They
queried the governor's office about private flying and the response was
positive for solo and flights with family members. Now, if only the
weather would cooperate!

On 3/27/2020 8:47 AM, BobWa43 wrote:
On Sunday, March 22, 2020 at 8:42:56 PM UTC-4, Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
Airsailing in NV has closed down, and now Willliams in CA is closed. will contests be cancelled next? Does SSA have a position on this? Are there things we can do to mitigate exposure so we can fly? Inquiring pilots want to know...
Keep the faith Matt. It would appear that the current numbers being reported do not support the doomsday scenarios. There may be hope for soaring this season.

--
Dan, 5J

I need my guns to protect my horde of toilet paper
:-)
ROY

A more tempered, but plausible, opinion from the WSJ that’s worth a read:

Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?
Current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by orders of magnitude. A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs it imposes on the economy, community and individual mental and physical health. We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current lockdowns.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/is-...ay-11585088464

Interesting article about the 1918 flu pandemic.
"...The studies reached another important conclusion: That relaxing intervention measures too early could cause an otherwise stabilized city to relapse. St. Louis, for example, was so emboldened by its low death rate that the city lifted restrictions on public gatherings less than two months after the outbreak began. A rash of new cases soon followed. Of the cities that kept interventions in place, none experienced a second wave of high death rates."

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/h...c-coronavirus/

I also heard that the cities with the flattest curves and most strict measures were in a better position to recover financially. Probably due to more people able to work and more people to buy the products, etc...

5Z

Duster wrote on 3/28/2020 7:19 PM:
A more tempered, but plausible, opinion from the WSJ that’s worth a read:

Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?
Current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by orders of magnitude. A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs it imposes on the economy, community and individual mental and physical health. We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current lockdowns.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/is-...ay-11585088464

That article is not accessible without paying. Not a good policy for the
newspaper, I think. A few free articles a month could build their circulation.


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

On 3/28/20 9:44 PM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Duster wrote on 3/28/2020 7:19 PM:
A more tempered, but plausible, opinion from the WSJ that’s worth a read:

Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?
Current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by
orders of magnitude. A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs
it imposes on the economy, community and individual mental and
physical health. We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the
empirical basis of the current lockdowns.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/is-...ay-11585088464


That article is not accessible without paying. Not a good policy for the
newspaper, I think. A few free articles a month could build their
circulation.


Worked for me without a subscription. Clear your cookies or try a
different computer.

This link has the essentials of the full WSJ article

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...rate?_amp=true

kinsell wrote on 3/28/2020 9:27 PM:
On 3/28/20 9:44 PM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Duster wrote on 3/28/2020 7:19 PM:
A more tempered, but plausible, opinion from the WSJ that’s worth a read:

Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?
Current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by orders of
magnitude. A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs it imposes on the
economy, community and individual mental and physical health. We should
undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current
lockdowns.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/is-...ay-11585088464


That article is not accessible without paying. Not a good policy for the
newspaper, I think. A few free articles a month could build their circulation.


Â*Worked for me without a subscription.Â* Clear your cookies or try a different
computer.

I've tried three browsers, clearing everything, but with the same results. What
browser did you use?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

On Saturday, March 28, 2020 at 8:19:43 PM UTC-6, Duster wrote:
A more tempered, but plausible, opinion from the WSJ that’s worth a read:

Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?
Current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by orders of magnitude. A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs it imposes on the economy, community and individual mental and physical health. We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current lockdowns.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/is-...ay-11585088464

That author is assuming a very large denominator in order to make his conclusions, but there is plenty of data to show he is completely wrong. In the US they are only testing people with symptoms who think they have the virus, yet 90% come back negative. In Italy, if you look at health care workers that are exposed and test positive, the death rate is orders of magnitude higher than this idiot suggests. Many people seem to forget that there is a 2-4 week delay between diagnosis and death. So to get an accurate death rate you need to look at the death rate on a certain day, and then look at the positive test rates from 3 weeks prior.

Richard DalCanto MD, PhD

Very good information, thanks!

But your calculation does not consider those who died, but had not been
tested.Â* They would be considered in the numerator but not in the
denominator and so would skew the death rate higher.

On 3/29/2020 7:22 AM, Richard DalCanto wrote:
So to get an accurate death rate you need to look at the death rate on a certain day, and then look at the positive test rates from 3 weeks prior.

Richard DalCanto MD, PhD

--
Dan, 5J