Upstate NY Banter and General Discussion..

[Buckeyes_Suck]

25 minutes ago, cny rider said:

There is nothing wrong with me.  I'm trying to get the facts straight.

You're the one focused on red blood cells, despite the fact that the articles you linked aren't about red blood cells.

The articles are about abnormal clotting in COVID patients, and the consequences that arise..

When you hear about clotting, think about platelets, endothelium, and fibrin.

Not red cells. Not hypoxemia or other terms you heard in a basic human physiology class and are now tossing around in a word salad.

 

You don't always have to be the smartest guy in the room.  It's fine to listen to other people who know more about a subject than you do.  Nobody will think less of you for it.

 

 

Show me where I mentioned "red blood cells". 

My point has only been that this virus isn't attacking the lung cells, that its attacking blood cells.

If you actually read the early articles I posted the one talks about the virus inhibiting the ability of blood to carry iron, which is necessary for maintaining oxygen levels.

This latest article I posted offers a different theory as to why the blood wont transport oxygen, that being that small clots are preventing circulation through the lungs.

So yes its hypoxemia, one way or the other. 

And since you're implying that you know more about the subject, what are your credentials? Are you or are you married to someone with a degree in medicine? Or work at an executive level in healthcare? Because coming here and simply stating someones incorrect without a fact based rebuttal or offering an alternative solution is pretty asinine. 

[Buckeyes_Suck]

We'll be lucky to put half of these people back to work in the next year.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/economy/unemployment-benefits-coronavirus/index.html

[cny rider]

54 minutes ago, Luke_Mages said:

Show me where I mentioned "red blood cells". 

My point has only been that this virus isn't attacking the lung cells, that its attacking blood cells.

If you actually read the early articles I posted the one talks about the virus inhibiting the ability of blood to carry iron, which is necessary for maintaining oxygen levels.

This latest article I posted offers a different theory as to why the blood wont transport oxygen, that being that small clots are preventing circulation through the lungs.

So yes its hypoxemia, one way or the other. 

And since you're implying that you know more about the subject, what are your credentials? Are you or are you married to someone with a degree in medicine? Or work at an executive level in healthcare? Because coming here and simply stating someones incorrect without a fact based rebuttal or offering an alternative solution is pretty asinine. 

Yes Luke, you are wrong. You keep repeating wrong information, and it isn't making it any more right.

It's OK to admit that other people know more about a subject than you do.

When Lake Effect King is in here posting about snow we listen and learn, and we all know he's the expert.  No need to one-up him.

Maybe it will make you feel better hearing that I am an MD, practicing Hematologist/Oncologist.  Maybe it won't, I don't know.

[Buckeyes_Suck]

4 minutes ago, cny rider said:

Yes Luke, you are wrong. You keep repeating wrong information, and it isn't making it any more right.

It's OK to admit that other people know more about a subject than you do.

When Lake Effect King is in here posting about snow we listen and learn, and we all know he's the expert.  No need to one-up him.

Maybe it will make you feel better hearing that I am an MD, practicing Hematologist/Oncologist.  Maybe it won't, I don't know.

Ok then you should be able to explain why you disagree with my hypothesis, instead of hand waving. I'm listening, and if it makes sense I'll agree with you.

[MJO812]

My co worker is in the hospital with pneumonia  and a blood clot. Not doing good. He is in his mid 30s.

A sgt from my pct has also been in the hospital for 3 weeks with Covid.

[cny rider]

OK last try, then I give up.

You posted this:

"More evidence that this virus is attacking primarily the blood cells. The acute respiratory distress that is listed as the leading cause of death as a result of covid is simply a byproduct of the lungs overworking to replenish oxygen to blood cells that can no longer carry oxygen."

It shows a complete lack of understanding of what the article is about, as well as how the virus attacks the body.

The virus is not attacking red blood cells.  

It is causing microscopic thromboemboli to form in some patients.  As I noted above those form from platelets and associated coagulation factors, usually in the setting of endothelial cell dysfunction. 

The thromboemboli lodge in the lungs and impair gas exchange causing hypoxia.  

The red cells are working fine, doing what they do which is transport oxygen.  There just isn't enough oxygen for them to transport to satisfy the body's needs.

If the virus attacked red cells you might expect to see hemolysis.  Note that hemolysis is never mentioned in the article.

Clear enough?

 

 

[Buckeyes_Suck]

10 minutes ago, cny rider said:

OK last try, then I give up.

You posted this:

"More evidence that this virus is attacking primarily the blood cells. The acute respiratory distress that is listed as the leading cause of death as a result of covid is simply a byproduct of the lungs overworking to replenish oxygen to blood cells that can no longer carry oxygen."

It shows a complete lack of understanding of what the article is about, as well as how the virus attacks the body.

The virus is not attacking red blood cells.  

It is causing microscopic thromboemboli to form in some patients.  As I noted above those form from platelets and associated coagulation factors, usually in the setting of endothelial cell dysfunction. 

The thromboemboli lodge in the lungs and impair gas exchange causing hypoxia.  

The red cells are working fine, doing what they do which is transport oxygen.  There just isn't enough oxygen for them to transport to satisfy the body's needs.

If the virus attacked red cells you might expect to see hemolysis.  Note that hemolysis is never mentioned in the article.

Clear enough?

 

 

You just said the same thing that I did, that clots are preventing the blood from entering the lungs and exchanging oxygen. This virus isn't directly reducing lung capacity by attacking cells in the lungs.

Furthermore, these two articles that I posted previously still haven't been addressed by you, and both hypothesize that the virus is directly affecting blood cells. Not reproducing in them and destroying them so that you'd see hemolysis, but reducing their ability to carry oxygen.

https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID-19_Disease_ORF8_and_Surface_Glycoprotein_Inhibit_Heme_Metabolism_by_Binding_to_Porphyrin/11938173

https://web.archive.org/web/20200405061401/https://medium.com/@agaiziunas/covid-19-had-us-all-fooled-but-now-we-might-have-finally-found-its-secret-91182386efcb

[BuffaloWeather]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/politics/gyms-reopening-lobbying-coronavirus-trump-phase-one/index.html

[cleetussnow]

On 4/19/2020 at 7:08 PM, rochesterdave said:

It’s unfortunate that we have to revisit the notion that mortgage borrowers were to blame for the financial crisis. It’s was the derivatives betting market that blew it all to hell. You guys always latch onto some convenient narrative that blames the poor. The amount that Freddy and Fanny contributed to the crisis was paltry. 
Were they lending to less than qualified people? Sure. You bet. But it was the 70x margin trading that was to blame. If the nut of the lend had failed, or even 10x of the nut, we would’ve been ok. It was the fact that the derivatives house of cards gave way that caused insolvency. 

Way over simplistic.  Fraud was the principal cause of the crisis.  My whole statement never mentions borrowers.  it does say the government relaxed rules to allow lending to sup prime borrowers, which ran against the government agencies charter (like Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, etc.).  Fraud ensued as all lenders, independent brokers, servicer, etc. all followed suit.  The whole market right up to the top looked the other way.  Borrowers were enabled to get in over their heads.  I don't blame them 100%, but I would say 60% since many were not truthful on their applications.  The worst part came when that information was deemed "verified"  (it wasn't) when the loans were put into securities.  Investors had no idea that they were buying junk.  Rating agencies affirmed that the underlying loans were investment grade when they were not.  The latter compounded an already ugly situation.  

Bush very pointedly said the market was broken.  Its on the record and you can check.   

The derivatives contracts were in response to the fraudulent lending.  Banks and a handful of investors discovered anomalies in the securities, and took out hedges.  The most famous one was when Goldman took out a contract with AIG to cover the derivative contract they made with a hedge fund.  The hedge fund and Goldman didn't do anything wrong in their transaction.  Where Goldman got in trouble is when they took out a insurance policy with AIG to cover this trade in the event it went south on them.  Goldman wanted to be risk neutral so they covered their butts.  They only wanted to receive fees.  The FLAW in this trade is they did not ask themselves if AIG would be able to actually cover the contract they made with Goldman.  That is called counter party risk.  Goldman wanted to receive the fees for the contract with the hedge fund, but they did not want to pay the $1 Billion.  Covering a risk with a contract with a counter party is common, just contracts this huge are not.  The hedge fund took advantage of information asymmetry to set up the trade, which is why markets exist.  

I won't argue that wall street didn't play a role because they were BAD actors.  They can't run their own books for example (See Volcker Rule). WHOLE other story.   But the entire mortgage system was rife with fraud, mismanagement, lax rules and LAWS, from stem to stern.  And so it exploded literally.  Many people spoke up about the potential risks, going back to 1998 even!  My own view is there are 2 factors:

Home ownership for everyone was viewed to be a noble cause (and it is)

Principal mortgage market participants looked the other way on fraud and anomalies in order to make money, taking advantage of the above sentiment.

it was a perfect storm!  Greed synced with public good in an effed up distorted way to create a global crisis.  

 

[BuffaloWeather]

Props to all the top 1% lobbyist negotiating for the lowly folk. 

[BuffaloWeather]

13 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

Way over simplistic.  Fraud was the principal cause of the crisis.  My whole statement never mentions borrowers.  it does say the government relaxed rules to allow lending to sup prime borrowers, which ran against the government agencies charter (like Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, etc.).  Fraud ensued as all lenders, independent brokers, servicer, etc. all followed suit.  The whole market right up to the top looked the other way.  Borrowers were enabled to get in over their heads.  I don't blame them 100%, but I would say 60% since many were not truthful on their applications.  The worst part came when that information was deemed "verified"  (it wasn't) when the loans were put into securities.  Investors had no idea that they were buying junk.  Rating agencies affirmed that the underlying loans were investment grade when they were not.  The latter compounded an already ugly situation.  

Bush very pointedly said the market was broken.  Its on the record and you can check.   

The derivatives contracts were in response to the fraudulent lending.  Banks and a handful of investors discovered anomalies in the securities, and took out hedges.  The most famous one was when Goldman took out a contract with AIG to cover the derivative contract they made with a hedge fund.  The hedge fund and Goldman didn't do anything wrong in their transaction.  Where Goldman got in trouble is when they took out a insurance policy with AIG to cover this trade in the event it went south on them.  Goldman wanted to be risk neutral so they covered their butts.  They only wanted to receive fees.  The FLAW in this trade is they did not ask themselves if AIG would be able to actually cover the contract they made with Goldman.  That is called counter party risk.  Goldman wanted to receive the fees for the contract with the hedge fund, but they did not want to pay the $1 Billion.  Covering a risk with a contract with a counter party is common, just contracts this huge are not.  The hedge fund took advantage of information asymmetry to set up the trade, which is why markets exist.  

I won't argue that wall street didn't play a role because they were BAD actors.  They can't run their own books for example (See Volcker Rule). WHOLE other story.   But the entire mortgage system was rife with fraud, mismanagement, lax rules and LAWS, from stem to stern.  And so it exploded literally.  Many people spoke up about the potential risks, going back to 1998 even!  My own view is there are 2 factors:

Home ownership for everyone was viewed to be a noble cause (and it is)

Principal mortgage market participants looked the other way on fraud and anomalies in order to make money, taking advantage of the above sentiment.

it was a perfect storm!  Greed synced with public good in an effed up distorted way to create a global crisis.  

 

This is great stuff, you have any more information? 

[cleetussnow]

7 minutes ago, BuffaloWeather said:

This is great stuff, you have any more information? 

tons - 

I could try to breakdown what a securitization is, what tranches are, and what credit ratings roles are...and the concept of what a rating enhancement is.  ratings play a big part in the landscape.

then I can talk about the crazy derivatives that Rochester Dave was talking about

then we can talk about TALF, and go back to TARP. 

Of course I have to do the day job but I think the above stuff is important

 

[BuffaloWeather]

16 minutes ago, cleetussnow said:

tons

 

I need more. Give me a top 5 rundown.

[OSUmetstud]

Cuomo released preliminary antibody data from NY

13.9 percent of NY sample had antibodies

21.2 percent NYC

3.6 percent upstate ny (excluding NYC Rockland, Westchester, Nassau, and Suffolk)

 

[OSUmetstud]

Not exactly a promising finding. Perhaps neutral or disappointing depending on what you thought the fatality rate might be. This would put fatality rate at 0.8 or 0.9 if you include the NYC confirmed and probably deaths. 

[Syrmax]

1 hour ago, cleetussnow said:

Way over simplistic.  Fraud was the principal cause of the crisis.  My whole statement never mentions borrowers.  it does say the government relaxed rules to allow lending to sup prime borrowers, which ran against the government agencies charter (like Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, etc.).  Fraud ensued as all lenders, independent brokers, servicer, etc. all followed suit.  The whole market right up to the top looked the other way.  Borrowers were enabled to get in over their heads.  I don't blame them 100%, but I would say 60% since many were not truthful on their applications.  The worst part came when that information was deemed "verified"  (it wasn't) when the loans were put into securities.  Investors had no idea that they were buying junk.  Rating agencies affirmed that the underlying loans were investment grade when they were not.  The latter compounded an already ugly situation.  

Bush very pointedly said the market was broken.  Its on the record and you can check.   

The derivatives contracts were in response to the fraudulent lending.  Banks and a handful of investors discovered anomalies in the securities, and took out hedges.  The most famous one was when Goldman took out a contract with AIG to cover the derivative contract they made with a hedge fund.  The hedge fund and Goldman didn't do anything wrong in their transaction.  Where Goldman got in trouble is when they took out a insurance policy with AIG to cover this trade in the event it went south on them.  Goldman wanted to be risk neutral so they covered their butts.  They only wanted to receive fees.  The FLAW in this trade is they did not ask themselves if AIG would be able to actually cover the contract they made with Goldman.  That is called counter party risk.  Goldman wanted to receive the fees for the contract with the hedge fund, but they did not want to pay the $1 Billion.  Covering a risk with a contract with a counter party is common, just contracts this huge are not.  The hedge fund took advantage of information asymmetry to set up the trade, which is why markets exist.  

I won't argue that wall street didn't play a role because they were BAD actors.  They can't run their own books for example (See Volcker Rule). WHOLE other story.   But the entire mortgage system was rife with fraud, mismanagement, lax rules and LAWS, from stem to stern.  And so it exploded literally.  Many people spoke up about the potential risks, going back to 1998 even!  My own view is there are 2 factors:

Home ownership for everyone was viewed to be a noble cause (and it is)

Principal mortgage market participants looked the other way on fraud and anomalies in order to make money, taking advantage of the above sentiment.

it was a perfect storm!  Greed synced with public good in an effed up distorted way to create a global crisis.  

 

Spot on @cleetussnow

I would just add, for posterity:

During the run-up to the 2008 crisis i followed a blog - Calculated Risk - that was run by (IIRC) a couple of individuals that were well experienced in the R/E financial field.  It was shocking to read about how the entire residential mortgage loan system was shot through with corruption, greed, and ignorance, from the people agreeing to mortgages with preposterous terms, to the mortgage companies arranging the loans, to the Appraisers (the f@cking appraisers even), who were matching home appraisals to whatever the loan was going to be as they were incentivized to support loans because they were paid per appraisal...by the mortgage companies (or lenders).  Then you get to the Wall Street financial "engineering" and it was even worse.  Sure enough, it all blew up.  

The only other thing i'd add as a backstory to 2008 (and this has been missed / forgotten by vapid Democrats and Republicans), is that pressure for the Financial Crisis stemmed back to what were thought to be good ideas in the 1990s.  It's a sordid story full of players that are still cited as "experts" (looking at you Larry Summers and Alan Greenspan), but basically there was political pressure from the Left to expand Home Ownership.  The Right, (and Libertarian Greenspan) rationalized this with the noble lie that expanding home ownership to lower income people would make more of the population "invested" in the economy, jobs, supporting the status quo...neither of which were wrong ideas.  But...then the Banks were deregulated in the late 1990s because they were crying they couldn't make money and compete globally with new Investment Banking.  So...Congress (a bipartisan effort) sh!tcanned the last of the 1930s Glass-Steagall rules that were still in effect from the heinous excesses that helped trigger the Great Depression (reckless lending, excessive leverage, etc.).  So then the banks did what banks do...create new financial products to maximize gains and a derivative "insurance" system that promised to distribute losses should an R/E downturn occur.  Except that it too was shot through with fraud and corruption from top to bottom...all while Regulators (SEC, etc) were asleep at the wheel kissing the asses of the likes of Bernie Madoff and surfing internet porn at the office (SEC staffers were fired over this, for real).

End rant.

 

[BuffaloWeather]

7 minutes ago, OSUmetstud said:

Cuomo released preliminary antibody data from NY

13.9 percent of NY sample had antibodies

21.2 percent NYC

3.6 percent upstate ny (excluding NYC Rockland, Westchester, Nassau, and Suffolk)

 

This is HUGE news. If 20% of the USA already has this we are already close to herd immunity which is 40%. We can thus start slowly opening the country back up in stages and not have to worry about overwhelming the hospitals. 

[OSUmetstud]

Just now, BuffaloWeather said:

This is HUGE news. If 20% of the USA already has this we are already close to herd immunity which is 40%. We can thus start slowly opening the country back up in stages. 

You really dont seem to understand the numbers...

[BuffaloWeather]

Just now, OSUmetstud said:

You really dont seem to understand the numbers...

I do understand the numbers. 20% of the population has already had it, herd immunity is 40%. 

[Buckeyes_Suck]

Just now, BuffaloWeather said:

I do understand the numbers. 20% of the population has already had it, herd immunity is 40%. 

I think its only 20% in NY, and mainly downstate as upstate is only at 3.6%.

The numbers for herd immunity Ive seen are 60%.

[BuffaloWeather]

Just now, Luke_Mages said:

I think its only 20% in NY, and mainly downstate as upstate is only at 3.6%.

The numbers for herd immunity Ive seen are 60%.

I'm trying to be optimistic here.  

[BuffaloWeather]

Can we really compare the mortality rate of the seasonal flu which has a vaccine with COVID-19 which has no herd immunity or a vaccine? I don't think we can. 

[OSUmetstud]

2 minutes ago, BuffaloWeather said:

I do understand the numbers. 20% of the population has already had it, herd immunity is 40%. 

Lol. 3.6 percent of upstate ny and 21 percent of NYC. The state and the city is literally the hardest hit area in the entire country. How do you get 20 percent nationwide?

[BuffaloWeather]

2 minutes ago, OSUmetstud said:

Lol. 3.6 percent of upstate ny and 21 percent of NYC. The state and the city is literally the hardest hit area in the entire country. How do you get 20 percent nationwide?

It's too small of a sample size still. But I agree, sorry looked to quickly at the numbers. 

[BuffaloWeather]

10 minutes ago, OSUmetstud said:

Lol. 3.6 percent of upstate ny and 21 percent of NYC. The state and the city is literally the hardest hit area in the entire country. How do you get 20 percent nationwide?

The first death (so far) has been traced back to California on Feb 6th, in which that victim likely had it a minimum of 3-4 weeks before that. Who is to say that California has a large percentage of the population with antibodies already? Who is to say that NYC is the hardest hit area because the mutation of the virus was stronger there, not just because there were more cases there? There are so many unknowns. 

https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/04/22/us/22reuters-health-coronavirus-usa-california.html

[cny rider]

25 minutes ago, Syrmax said:

Spot on @cleetussnow

I would just add, for posterity:

During the run-up to the 2008 crisis i followed a blog - Calculated Risk - that was run by (IIRC) a couple of individuals that were well experienced in the R/E financial field.  It was shocking to read about how the entire residential mortgage loan system was shot through with corruption, greed, and ignorance, from the people agreeing to mortgages with preposterous terms, to the mortgage companies arranging the loans, to the Appraisers (the f@cking appraisers even), who were matching home appraisals to whatever the loan was going to be as they were incentivized to support loans because they were paid per appraisal...by the mortgage companies (or lenders).  Then you get to the Wall Street financial "engineering" and it was even worse.  Sure enough, it all blew up.  

The only other thing i'd add as a backstory to 2008 (and this has been missed / forgotten by vapid Democrats and Republicans), is that pressure for the Financial Crisis stemmed back to what were thought to be good ideas in the 1990s.  It's a sordid story full of players that are still cited as "experts" (looking at you Larry Summers and Alan Greenspan), but basically there was political pressure from the Left to expand Home Ownership.  The Right, (and Libertarian Greenspan) rationalized this with the noble lie that expanding home ownership to lower income people would make more of the population "invested" in the economy, jobs, supporting the status quo...neither of which were wrong ideas.  But...then the Banks were deregulated in the late 1990s because they were crying they couldn't make money and compete globally with new Investment Banking.  So...Congress (a bipartisan effort) sh!tcanned the last of the 1930s Glass-Steagall rules that were still in effect from the heinous excesses that helped trigger the Great Depression (reckless lending, excessive leverage, etc.).  So then the banks did what banks do...create new financial products to maximize gains and a derivative "insurance" system that promised to distribute losses should an R/E downturn occur.  Except that it too was shot through with fraud and corruption from top to bottom...all while Regulators (SEC, etc) were asleep at the wheel kissing the asses of the likes of Bernie Madoff and surfing internet porn at the office (SEC staffers were fired over this, for real).

End rant.

 

If anyone is really interested in all the mechanics, I wholly agree with looking at Calculated Risk and particularly reading the Ubernerd series of posts.

It was incredibly informative and well written, and fascinating to watch as it unfolded in real time back then.

One of the authors, a woman who went by Tanta, died of cancer as the whole thing was unraveling.

 

[cleetussnow]

39 minutes ago, Syrmax said:

Spot on @cleetussnow

I would just add, for posterity:

During the run-up to the 2008 crisis i followed a blog - Calculated Risk - that was run by (IIRC) a couple of individuals that were well experienced in the R/E financial field.  It was shocking to read about how the entire residential mortgage loan system was shot through with corruption, greed, and ignorance, from the people agreeing to mortgages with preposterous terms, to the mortgage companies arranging the loans, to the Appraisers (the f@cking appraisers even), who were matching home appraisals to whatever the loan was going to be as they were incentivized to support loans because they were paid per appraisal...by the mortgage companies (or lenders).  Then you get to the Wall Street financial "engineering" and it was even worse.  Sure enough, it all blew up.  

The only other thing i'd add as a backstory to 2008 (and this has been missed / forgotten by vapid Democrats and Republicans), is that pressure for the Financial Crisis stemmed back to what were thought to be good ideas in the 1990s.  It's a sordid story full of players that are still cited as "experts" (looking at you Larry Summers and Alan Greenspan), but basically there was political pressure from the Left to expand Home Ownership.  The Right, (and Libertarian Greenspan) rationalized this with the noble lie that expanding home ownership to lower income people would make more of the population "invested" in the economy, jobs, supporting the status quo...neither of which were wrong ideas.  But...then the Banks were deregulated in the late 1990s because they were crying they couldn't make money and compete globally with new Investment Banking.  So...Congress (a bipartisan effort) sh!tcanned the last of the 1930s Glass-Steagall rules that were still in effect from the heinous excesses that helped trigger the Great Depression (reckless lending, excessive leverage, etc.).  So then the banks did what banks do...create new financial products to maximize gains and a derivative "insurance" system that promised to distribute losses should an R/E downturn occur.  Except that it too was shot through with fraud and corruption from top to bottom...all while Regulators (SEC, etc) were asleep at the wheel kissing the asses of the likes of Bernie Madoff and surfing internet porn at the office (SEC staffers were fired over this, for real).

End rant.

 

thanks man, and spot on here as well!  

[lakeeffectkid383]

So if you say 3.6 % of Erie Counties population has been infected that’s 33073 people. If there’s been 188 deaths thus far that’s 0.56% death rate. Erie county has stated they have not included any probable deaths in their figures though so you can probably add another 50 deaths or so considering NYC added over 5000 probable deaths thus far. So even if your closer to 230 deaths from Covid  your at 0.7% death rate which doesn’t sound bad, until you realize that’s 7 times the death rate of the seasonal flu, and that’s with extensive social distancing and closures. 

[BuffaloWeather]

If the first recorded death from Corona related was Feb 6th in California that means this virus went across this country unmitigated for 8-10 weeks. More people then we think already have antibodies and would assume the majority of people are asymptomatic thus lowering the mortality rate substantially.  

[BuffaloWeather]

#COVID19 Preliminary results from N=3000 sero-survey in New York State found 13.9% tested positive for antibodies against the #coronavirus

21.2% in NYC tested positive, which would imply 1.78 million people!

Waiting for more details on the assay/methodhttps://t.co/cvkgazXB0Z pic.twitter.com/RiwLgWIOr8

— Andy Biotech (@AndyBiotech) April 23, 2020