Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#98,051
#98,051
evillawyer said:
By your reasoning, there should be only 7 new people that get covid in the united states at some point in the future (51 million x 7 = 355 million, which exceeds the US population). Wanna do a little wager on that one?
Click to expand...
How many people do you think will get infected if 100% of the population is vaccinated? Also keep in mind there’s a strong correlation between efficacy and the reduction of shed virus in the off chance you’re infected.

Do the vaccines work or not?
 
#98,052
#98,052
volfanhill said:
You have a 1 in 292 million chance of winning the powerball lottery. By your logic there would only be one winner a year.
Click to expand...

Not following you love. The odds of winning a lottery are based on tickets (each with one set of numbers) and the possible combinations of those numbers. But individuals buy hundreds of tickets. So YOUR odds depends on how many tickets you buy.
 
#98,054
#98,054
evillawyer said:
No, I was saying both. Masks, even crappy ones, provide some degree of protection to the wearer. The primary rationale for them though (at least the cloth and surgical ones) is that they reduce the number large droplets expelled and limit the range of the ones that do escape.

My post recognizes both benefits.

Like I said, read closer my love.
Click to expand...
Maybe pictures help
716F4E87-8463-4E5D-9E29-279A0B9ED31C.jpeg
 
#98,058
#98,058
DancingOutlaw said:
How many people do you think will get infected if 100% of the population is vaccinated? Also keep in mind there’s a strong correlation between efficacy and the reduction of shed virus in the off chance you’re infected.

Do the vaccines work or not?
Click to expand...
You don’t owe her any more explanation. Your probability was correct for the conditions you applied. She’s the nimrod trying to sell the fake goods as usual.
 
#98,059
#98,059
evillawyer said:
Not following you love. The odds of winning a lottery are based on tickets (each with one set of numbers) and the possible combinations of those numbers. But individuals buy hundreds of tickets. So YOUR odds depends on how many tickets you buy.
Click to expand...
No you’re being obtuse or you really don’t understand conditional probabilities shrew. His estimate was correct 🤡
 
#98,063
#98,063
NorthDallas40 said:
No you’re being obtuse or you really don’t understand conditional probabilities shrew. His estimate was correct 🤡
Click to expand...

Explain my misunderstanding asshat. I was told a vaccinated person has a 1 in 51 million chance of getting infected. Accepting that premise as true, I extrapolated that roughly 7 people in the United States would be infected given our population (~340 million). Explain to me where I went wrong.
 
#98,064
#98,064
evillawyer said:
Explain my misunderstanding asshat. I was told a vaccinated person has a 1 in 51 million chance of getting infected. Accepting that premise as true, I extrapolated that roughly 7 people in the United States would be infected given our population (~340 million). Explain to me where I went wrong.
Click to expand...
It’s simple you suck at probabilities calculations shrew. The estimate is an intersection of the data sets. In math terms it’s the multiplicative result of each individual probability 15000*1700*2=1:51,000,000. You’re dismissed go torture your orange tabby. 🤡
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinbham
#98,065
#98,065
NorthDallas40 said:
It’s simple you suck at probabilities calculations shrew. The estimate is an intersection of the data sets. In math terms it’s the multiplicative result of each individual probability 1500*17000*2=1:51,000,000. You’re dismissed go torture your orange tabby. 🤡
Click to expand...

So, given those odds, in a population of 51 million, you'd expect roughly 1 case. Pray tell, how many would you expect in a population of 357 million?
 
#98,066
#98,066
evillawyer said:
So, given those odds, in a population of 51 million, you'd expect roughly 1 case. Pray tell, how many would you expect in a population of 357 million?
Click to expand...
I just gave you the accurate probably calculation based on the conditions DO set up for the calc. That is the explanation. I can’t help it if you’re too stupid to understand it shrew 🤡
 
#98,067
#98,067
NorthDallas40 said:
I just gave you the accurate probably calculation based on the conditions DO set up for the calc. That is the explanation. I can’t help it if you’re too stupid to understand it shrew 🤡
Click to expand...

So, if there's a 50/50 chance of a heads coin flip, we'd expect roughly 5 heads if we did 10 flips. And if we did 100 flips, we'd expect roughly 50. Wouldn't you agree? So again I ask, where did I go wrong Cap'n Obtuse? 1 in 51 million chance, over a population of roughly 340 million, we'd expect slightly less than 7 instances.
 
#98,068
#98,068
evillawyer said:
So, if there's a 50/50 chance of a heads coin flip, we'd expect roughly 5 heads if we did 10 flips. And if we did 100 flips, we'd expect roughly 50. Wouldn't you agree? So again I ask, where did I go wrong Cap'n Obtuse? 1 in 51 million chance, over a population of roughly 340 million, we'd expect slightly less than 7 instances.
Click to expand...
So you do suck at conditional probability. Hill gave it to you in layshrew terms and you still don’t get it. There is more than one interaction. You are stupidly using one variable. DO had three dependent variables in his example. Womp womp 🤡

Edit: DO had three independent variables not dependent
 
Last edited:
#98,069
#98,069
NorthDallas40 said:
So you do suck at conditional probability. Hill gave it to you in layshrew terms and you still don’t get it. There is more than one interaction. You are stupidity using one variable. DO had three dependent variables in his example. Womp womp 🤡
Click to expand...

Here's the original post. It contains a clear inconsistency. First line says "1 in 15,000 chance of getting infected while vaccinated." Last line says says "1 in 51,000,000 chance of getting infected all things being equal." Those can't both be true. Further, the first premise (1 in 15000 chance of getting infected while vaccinated) would already have baked in that you've encountered someone with covid and they gave it to you.

You have a 1 in 15,000 chance of getting infected while vaccinated.
You have a 1 in 1,700 chance of encountering someone with Covid.
They have a 50% chance to give it to you with prolonged exposure.
So that’s 1 in 51,000,000 chance of getting infected all things being equal. Outside would make that even less likely.
 
#98,070
#98,070
evillawyer said:
Here's the original post. It contains a clear inconsistency. First line says "1 in 15,000 chance of getting infected while vaccinated." Last line says says "1 in 51,000,000 chance of getting infected all things being equal." Those can't both be true. Further, the first premise (1 in 15000 chance of getting infected while vaccinated) would already have baked in that you've encountered someone with covid and they gave it to you.

You have a 1 in 15,000 chance of getting infected while vaccinated.
You have a 1 in 1,700 chance of encountering someone with Covid.
They have a 50% chance to give it to you with prolonged exposure.
So that’s 1 in 51,000,000 chance of getting infected all things being equal. Outside would make that even less likely.
Click to expand...
The math is correct. The answer is an intersection of probabilities. Take the L on your ****** math skills and drop it shrew.
 
#98,071
#98,071
NorthDallas40 said:
The math is correct. The answer is an intersection of probabilities. Take the L on your ****** math skills and drop it shrew.
Click to expand...

The conclusion was that there is a 1 in 51 million chance of getting infected if. You've been vaccinated. It was not that any interaction has a 1 in 51 million chance of getting you infected. In fact, "interaction" isn't even used in the post. If the chance for any given person is 1 in 51 million, then there should be about 7 break through cases in America. There have been thousands.

Conclusion: you're an asshat.
 
#98,072
#98,072
evillawyer said:
The conclusion was that there is a 1 in 51 million chance of getting infected if. You've been vaccinated. It was not that any interaction has a 1 in 51 million chance of getting you infected. In fact, "interaction" isn't even used in the post. If the chance for any given person is 1 in 51 million, then there should be about 7 break through cases in America. There have been thousands.

Conclusion: you're an asshat.
Click to expand...
The real answer: you suck at math and can’t take the L and let it go shrew 🤡
 
#98,074
#98,074
NorthDallas40 said:
The real answer: you suck at math and can’t take the L and let it go shrew 🤡
Click to expand...

I got no math wrong. The 1 in 51 million figure was given as the chance of a person getting infected. It was not that any PARTICULAR interaction with another person carries a 1 in 51 million chance of infecting you. If, for any vaccinated person, there's a 1 in 51 million chance of getting infected, we'd expect no more than three or four breakthrough infections given the number of people vaccinated nationally. We are way above that.
 
#98,075
#98,075
evillawyer said:
I got no math wrong. The 1 in 51 million figure was given as the chance of a person getting infected. It was not that any PARTICULAR interaction with another person carries a 1 in 51 million chance of infecting you. If, for any vaccinated person, there's a 1 in 51 million chance of getting infected, we'd expect no more than three or four breakthrough infections given the number of people vaccinated nationally. We are way above that.
Click to expand...
Yes you are completely wrong on the math. The problem statement DO set forth calculates just as I have shown. The probability calculation as he set it up is correct. And pardon me for pointing out the CDC is FOS anyway and I’m not inclined to listen to any of their damn diatribes at the moment.

if you want to tell DO is initial ratios are wrong then tell him. But the math problem he outlined is correct. Go sleep it off
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top