jimsorgi
-
Posts
185 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by jimsorgi
-
-
1 hour ago, NotIThatLives said:
Pretty sure Kelly got 10 years 95 million at LSU what are you talking about 400k?
His base salary is $400k. They rest of it is supplemental income in exchange for media events, name/image/likeness, etc. The point is that universities often characterize coaching salaries in different ways and the fact that a tax filing said Kelly’s salary at ND was $2m means nothing.
-
All the first article tells you is how much ND characterized as base salary for Kelly, and the second article tells you even less.
The fact that Kelly’s salary at LSU is $400k should tell you how valuable that information is.
-
On 1/29/2022 at 4:55 PM, Hoosier82 said:
Brian Kelly was only making $2M a year, potentially more with incentives. ND is notorious for not being a high paying gig given the prestige of the job. DM is not just our RB coach, he’s an Associate HC…doubt ND is offering that or beating his current salary.
That’s not an accurate number for Kelly’s compensation at ND.
-
2 hours ago, dgambill said:
Wow...so my hypothesis about poor population dense countries like Bangladesh using it as preventive because people there can buy any medicine over the counter and it helping keep numbers low may have some merit. I think it’s clear that once someone is hospitalized it’s probably too late to use it but in the way Trump was using it and these poor countries like India and other southwestern Asian countries...hmm. One has to wonder if politics is and the drug industry is causing more harm then good. Maybe Trumps doctor had it right.
You realize that there have been studies using HCQ to prevent infection as well as very early in infection, right? And those studies showed no effective results?
But sure, let’s go with random anecdotal evidence from surely reliable newspapers because it fits with the narrative we want to believe.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, 5fouls said:
- Remdesiver is an alternate drug that seems to have benefits. That said, my understanding is Remdesiver is much more expensive than HCQ. In other words, it's much more profitable. As much as you would like to think that would not play a part, the reality is if you have two choices and one choice has more value to a special interest group, that special interest group is going to do everything possible to promote the choice that benefits it the most. Could/Would that include misinformation about the competition? Stuff like that happens all the time. You would like to think it would not happen in a scenario like this, but with billions on the line, who knows.
Gilead would certainly love for Remdesivir to become the go-to treatment, but no other pharmaceutical company would, and I don’t think Gilead has quite this strong a domination of every university researcher in the world.
Besides, by that logic, wouldn’t they skew the dexamethasone studies? That drug - cheap and easily available - has performed very well in COVID studies.
-
There are tons of empirical studies publicly a available on the effectiveness of HCQ.
Why in the world do we exclusively listen to the one or two studies that happen to get picked up or the anecdotal stories of some YouTube doctor?
By the way, if you do this (and you should for yourself!), you’ll likely find that the research consensus is “there’s insufficient evidence that HCQ is effective, but better randomized studies are required to be sure.”
-
26 minutes ago, Reacher said:
Stay safe down there. Apparently federal courthouses are now targets. They tried to burn down the one in Portland.
I think that’s a sensationalist statement (who comprises “they” and what leads to your determination that there are “targets”?), and particular context of the Portland situation does not exist at other federal courthouses.
-
34 minutes ago, IU Scott said:
President was just doing a press conference and says fatalities are down 75% from April.
Curious - what’s the basis for that?
-
1 minute ago, Leathernecks said:
This sentence I quoted throws up major red flags for me. The firm behind it called it "a major breakthrough" after a trial of 100 people.
It could be found to be a good treatment after more testing, but it sounds like someone wanting to get publicity/money (their shares went up 300% yesterday...hmmm).
The problem with small numbers is that they can skew things so much. Even if you flipped a coin 100 times, there are going to be times when you get 65+ tails. If you just look at that one trial, you'd say that you're about 90% more likely to get tails (65 to 35).
Most of the data in the trial isn't statistically significantly.
For sure - this is why it’s good to hold back from overreact to these “we showed in a lab that it appears to slow down viral replication” or even “Phase I trials showed promising results” stories.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, tdhoosier said:
Are they just adapting it from an existing formula already deemed safe that was made to fight other coronaviruses?
Very much depends on the vaccine manufacturer - there’s no one vaccine approach thus far, so we have a mix of modifications to existing vaccines, new versions similar to approved vaccines, and completely new vaccines. (This is an oversimplification, but you get the point).
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, 5fouls said:
The state/county/hospital decided yesterday that a Clark County resident who died on July 12th must have had Covid.
Or they knew it on July 13th and it took time to process the data (and/or confirm via a test). That’s been happening since Day 1 - Indiana has been very transparent about it.
-
36 minutes ago, 5fouls said:
Why hasn't the media in the U.S. picked up on this yet? Should be the lead story for every national media outlet.
It’s an interesting story that’s worth noting, but they haven’t even started testing out the theory. I don’t know that this is national headline news (there are literally hundreds of trials like this that are ongoing).
Now, show efficacy in human trials and we’re in a different place.
All that being said, the innovations that are developing to treat the virus post-infection are pretty impressive. Vaccine aside, that’s going to make a very positive impact.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, 5fouls said:
The Commonwealth of Kentucky reported 977 cases yesterday and only 253 today. Numbers that far apart in a 24 hour period are hard to accept as reality. One or the other is off for whatever reason.
Some states report testing numbers in batches. There’s nothing odd or suspicious about that - but that’s also why it’s better to look at 7-day averages; there’s significant day-to-day noise.
-
Brozinni (in Southport, and in Nashville): go for the pepperoni breadsticks.
Only sad part is the Nashville location replaced Harvest Moon - was a big fan of theirs.
-
15 hours ago, mrflynn03 said:
Columbus is a bit too far for me to get pizza but have bought 450 North beer from Big Red in Bedford. Really good.
450 North and Zwanzigz both have excellent pizza and excellent beer, in my opinion. Definitely worth picking up.
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, bluegrassIU said:
This is the kind of "jounalism" that makes people do stupid stuff.
Either you beleive the nonsense and go full blown panic extremes. Or you recognize they are playing to our fears and say to hell with it, its all hype. Then stop using common sense. This junk journalism is dangerous on all sides.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/america-track-million-coronavirus-cases-112633549.html
This type of sensationalism is so counterproductive.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, mrflynn03 said:
These dumbasses have no understanding of economics.
Or basic math. It’s incredible that no one involved in that clip pointed out the error.
-
5 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:
That Colorado man did test positive for COVID, by the way. So there was no wrong doing.
If you test positive for COVID when you die it’s marked as a COIVD death even though (in this case) it was most likely alcohol that killed them. This is just how it is reported. The instant you leave results open for human intrupretation is when they get skewed. There needs to be a constant that can’t be manipulated with human bias, in this case it is a positive or negative test.
And while you may fairly determine this particular case is not accurate, it’s a small outlier. While it should be considered, it doesn’t have a greater influence on the overall picture.
Yep. And there are other cases like this, obviously. But that doesn’t imply that we have a systemic data issue.
-
6 minutes ago, Reacher said:
From what I've seen, there are more state health departments and coroner's listing the cause of death than Dr's. This drastically reduces the numbers involved. The CO case with the 35 yr old with alcohol poisoning that received a lot of attention at the time was listed as Covid by the state health department and I think the Dr was one arguing against that.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2006100?articleTools=true
New England journal of medicine study. Findings include males more likely than females to get and kids under 10 unlikely to get.
But that cuts both ways, since if it truly a health department or coroner issuing it, “hospital finances” (as weak as that is) goes out the window.
The thing about conspiracy theories is we can always find outliers to support them.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, 5fouls said:
I agree with you that the majority of doctors are honest, just as the majority of the populace is honest.
So, who do we choose to believe?
In this case, what makes the doctor more credible than Scott's social worker friend? Are doctors more honorable than social workers? Is a doctor no one on here knows more likely to tell the truth than a good friend of a long time poster?
That’s a false equivalence though, right?
Simply because someone said “x” we have to treat it as if it’s true? Scott and Scott’s friend have no knowledge of the entirety of the pandemic; why would I say “well, one person said they didn’t think a death was related to covid and doctors thought it might be therefore we should invalidate all covid data because all doctors lie?”
My friend says Michael Jordan is actually a lizard person. That explains why he struggles to connect emotionally to people. Why wouldn’t you choose you believe him?
Obviously, the answer is that we look to the information we actually have (not just “I heard someone say this”). There are huge amounts of information supporting the true extent of the pandemic, and extremely minimal evidence - primarily isolated anecdotes - suggesting it is exaggerated to some unspecified degree.
Besides, none of this answers the basic question: why would doctors lie about it?
-
1
-
-
Of course there will be doctors that do things that are unethical. But that’s missing the point.
Is it reasonable to think that sufficiently large numbers of doctors (thousands) are lying on death certificates despite minimal (to the extent that they are really immaterial) short-term institutional financial benefits, significant medium to long term institutional financial harm, and zero personal financial benefit that the covid numbers are materially artificially inflated?
To me, that answer is a resounding “no.” I have no doubt that if we did a deep dive into every single death we’d find a few that didn’t line up - but an extremely small and immaterial percent. I also have no doubt that there have been deaths related to covid that weren’t captured for various reasons.
-
10 minutes ago, IUFLA said:
Thanks for the good summary.
Hospitals are experiencing major financial struggles due to covid. They have zero interest in artificially inflating the pandemic.
-
Those stories are pretty exaggerated, I think. The vast, vast majority of deaths related to covid are confirmed via a positive test. Yes, some of those people would have died anyway (and covid was merely a contributing cause), but that’s a relatively small group.
Besides, hospitals will also get significant insurance money for taking care of anything. There’s not a huge financial incentive to label it covid.
Oh, and hospitals make far more money on elective procedures, which decrease significantly when infections are high. So there’s a huge monetary incentive for hospitals to downplay the pandemic.
But, at the end of the day, main reason: doctors are generally going to do what they think the right thing to do is, not jump through hoops to please administrators.
-
2
-
-
Some great classic noir holds up well:
The Third Man
The Maltese Falcon
Double Indemnity
Off-Season
in General Football Discussion
Posted
Of course it’s semantics. Same as anything that says Kelly's salary at ND was $2m. That’s the whole point.
“Kelly’s full salary at Notre Dame, a private school, was unknown but was believed to be more than $5 million per year.”
https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/ct-brian-kelly-notre-dame-lsu-20211130-g76kaisw5fb75ayxvo4dydcimi-story.html?outputType=amp
ND is extremely tight-lipped about the finances of its athletic department but that number is more consistent with what I know from people in and around the university (not that anyone told me an exact number - but a general range).