Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Kirk's Market Thoughts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kirk © who wrote (9354)	4/20/2020 11:23:21 AM
From: robert b furman	1 Recommendation Recommended By kimberley Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26767

HI Kirk, I enjoy my alcohol relief far too much to consider a one year hiatus. I actually quit completely for over a year and a half. Found myself very hyper, had to be doing something constantly. Found myself to be a complete bore and never smiling. Alcohol definitely lowers my inhibitions. I chose to enjoy life more while alive. Still embracing denial I guess. That being said I greatly admire your control and sobriety. Bob

To: Kirk © who wrote (9354)	4/20/2020 11:59:19 AM
From: benwood	3 Recommendations Recommended By kimberley Kirk © rdkflorida2 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26767

This is the exact problem my pharmacist wife said, esp. when combined with that other drug, which also has a similar serious effect, but compounded when taken together. chloroquine to treat COVID-19 because too many died of heart issues...

To: Kirk © who wrote (9354)	4/20/2020 12:10:15 PM
From: benwood	Respond to of 26767

Time to buy oil? It appears to be the cheapest in 160 years in inflation adjusted terms:

To: Kirk © who wrote (9354)	4/23/2020 7:38:29 PM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26767

Over 18 months living and working there my kid found them to be heavy drinkers in general...

To: Kirk © who wrote (9354)	4/23/2020 8:39:34 PM
From: Winfastorlose	Respond to of 26767

Note how in an attempt to keep the population in a state of panic, CBS and Reuters refuse to mention the mortality rate indicated by the survey. New York Coronavirus Test Shows State-Wide 14% Infection Rate – New York City 21% – Data Indicates Mortality Rate 0.5%… Posted on April 23, 2020 Earlier today New York Governor Andrew Cuomo released initial data from 3,000 people tested for COVID-19 antibodies throughout the state. Interestingly, though not surprisingly, the field tests were conducted on the general public who were visiting retail supermarkets and box stores (WalMart, Target, Costco, etc.). The resulting data falls directly in line with previous CTH analysis of human interface. The preliminary New York results show a state-wide infection rate of 13.9 percent within the sample. Which would extend to 2.7 million people state-wide. With that infection rate, the mortality rate from the infection would drop to 0.5 percent. The samples show an infection rate in New York City is 21.2 percent. ( VIA CBS) – New York’s first survey of coronavirus antibodies shows that 13.9% of those tested in the state had coronavirus antibodies in their system, meaning they have contracted and recovered from the virus, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said Thursday. That suggests that 2.7 million people have been infected statewide. The survey was taken from a sample size of about 3,000 people found outside their homes, shopping at essential businesses, such as grocery stores, which remain open. Results show antibodies in 12% of women and 15.9% of men, but a disproportionate rate of antibodies in black and Latino New Yorkers.( more) ( Reuters) “If the infection rate is 13.9 percent, then it changes the theories of what the death rate is if you get infected,” Cuomo told a daily briefing. The survey targeted people who were out shopping, but not working, meaning they were not essential workers like grocery clerks or bus drivers but were more likely to test positive for antibodies than someone isolated at home, Cuomo said. ( read more) The direct result of this survey is that 14 percent of people in New York who interacted with retail supermarket cashiers were previously infected with the Coronavirus; or carried the coronavirus antibodies… REPEATING – There are few high-traffic businesses more densely populated than grocery stores. In fact, within the U.S. economy retail supermarkets have the highest foot traffic of any business sector in the entire economy; that’s just an empirical fact…. and the coronavirus impact increased that foot traffic by an average of 40 percent. Now, stop and think about this logically & apply a large dose of common sense. Think about human-to-human interface. ?First, with approximately 90 percent of the total U.S. population penetrating through grocery outlets; and with 100% of that massive number of consumers going through checkout lanes; if the COVID-19 viral strain was as significant as claimed by the worst-case data, then supermarket cashiers would have been the highest exposed profession of U.S. workers in the entire nation. There wouldn’t even be a close second place. Considering that metric; and considering the overall population penetration & density within the business operation; there has not been an employee-based business disruption due to the coronavirus. Put another way: the coronavirus has not stopped the function of the highest human interface occupation in the entire U.S. economy. ?Secondly, think about the businesses that are closed; perhaps think about your job that may have been shut down…. now frame your risk based on the supermarket example as highest human interface and highest population penetration in any business field. If the #1 at risk industry has operated, essentially without disruption and with almost zero substantive mitigation, while carrying the largest population exposure rate, then all other less-exposed business operations would have significantly less operational risk. Why would anyone be concerned about opening their business? If you take the factual outcome of the retail food industry as a measure, it would follow that other than a few proximity businesses which may need prudent modifications or remain temporarily closed (ex. modified airplane seating, concerts, stadiums or capacity seating venues etc), then all other businesses should immediately resume operations. No other business segment within the economy is as exposed to the population as the retail food business; and yet supermarkets operated without issue. So why shouldn’t all businesses immediately get back to work? Perhaps a few initial modifications might be needed; but not much, and not for long. Think about it….

To: Kirk © who wrote (9354)	4/23/2020 10:19:07 PM
From: Winfastorlose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26767

Preliminary results of USC-LA County COVID-19 study released April 20, 2020 USC-LA County Study: Early Results of Antibody Testing Suggest Number of COVID-19 Infections Far Exceeds Number of Confirmed Cases in Los Angeles County Watch highlights from the L.A. County Department of Public Health’s presentation of preliminary results on YouTube.Learn more about the initial findings from the study in this video of a Q&A with researchers Neeraj Sood and Paul Simon.Contact: Leigh Hopper, USC Media Relations, uscnews@usc.edu or (213) 740-2215; Carl Kemp, LA County Public Health Communications, ckemp@ph.lacounty.gov or (323) 365-7260 Los Angeles (April 20, 2020) – USC and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (Public Health) today released preliminary results from a collaborative scientific study that suggests infections from the new coronavirus are far more widespread – and the fatality rate much lower — in L.A. County than previously thought. The findings are from the first round of an ongoing study by USC researchers and Public Health officials. They will be conducting antibody testing over time on a series of representative samples of adults to determine the scope and spread of the pandemic across the county. Based on testing results from 863 adults, the research team estimates that approximately 4.1% of the county’s adult population has antibody to the virus. Adjusting this estimate for statistical margin of error implies about 2.8% to 5.6% of the county’s adult population has antibody to the virus— which translates to approximately 221,000 to 442,000 adults in the county who have had the infection. That estimate is 28 to 55 times higher than the 7,994 confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported to the county by the time of the study in early April. The number of COVID-related deaths in the county has now surpassed 600. “We haven’t known the true extent of COVID-19 infections in our community because we have only tested people with symptoms, and the availability of tests has been limited,” said lead investigator Neeraj Sood, a USC professor of public policy at USC Price School for Public Policy and senior fellow at USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics. “The estimates also suggest that we might have to recalibrate disease prediction models and rethink public health strategies.” The results have important implications for public health efforts to control the local epidemic. “These results indicate that many persons may have been unknowingly infected and at risk of transmitting the virus to others,” said Dr. Barbara Ferrer, director of the L.A. County Department of Public Health. “These findings underscore the importance of expanded polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing to diagnose those with infection so they can be isolated and quarantined, while also maintaining the broad social distancing interventions.” The antibody test is helpful for identifying past infection, but a PCR test is required to diagnose current infection. “Though the results indicate a lower risk of death among those with infection than was previously thought, the number of COVID-related deaths each day continues to mount, highlighting the need for continued vigorous prevention and control efforts,” said Dr. Paul Simon, chief science officer at L.A. County Department of Public Health and co-lead on the study. The study’s results have not yet been peer reviewed by other scientists. The researchers plan to test new groups of participants every few weeks in coming months to gauge the pandemic’s trajectory in the region. About the study With help from medical students from the Keck School of Medicine of USC, USC researchers and Public Health officials conducted drive-through antibody testing April 10th and 11th at six sites. Participants were recruited via a proprietary database that is representative of the county population. The database is maintained by LRW Group, a market research firm. The researchers used a rapid antibody test for the study. The FDA allows such tests for public health surveillance to gain greater clarity on actual infection rates. The test’s accuracy was further assessed at a lab at Stanford University using blood samples that were positive and negative for COVID-19. In addition to Sood and Simon, other authors and institutions contributing to the study include Peggy Ebner of the Keck School; Daniel Eichner of the Sports Medicine Research & Testing Laboratory; Jeffrey Reynolds of LRW Group; Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford University School of Medicine. The study was supported with funding from USC Schwarzenegger Institute, USC Lusk Center, USC President’s Office, Jedel Foundation, LRW Group, Soap Box Sample, and several individual donors. More information A recent Q&A with Neeraj Sood on antibody testing can be found here.See the Los Angeles County’s April 16, 2020, Health Advisory SARS-CoV2 Serology Advisory for clarification on antibody testing.B-roll and photos from the April 10-11, 2020 antibody testing conducted in Los Angeles can be found here.To learn more about the L.A. County Department of Public Health and the work they do, visit the following sites and pages: