Covid Discussion

[kitzbuel]

Would we have shut down our economy based on these current accurate projections?

The only way these projections are arrived at are through the the actions that shutdown the economy. What you are saying is kind of like saying 'would we have put all that water on the fire if we knew ahead of time the fire would not be big?' The only reason the fire isn't big is because water was applied.

The projections became accurate based on the social distancing activities, to include economic actions, that were implemented. As changes are made to input (economic activity, social distancing) the actuals change. Once the effects of these actions are included in the projections, they make better projections.

[Zagceo]

Sweden chose another path ....

I recall some on this board predicted huge losses.....even with “stay at home” policy.

Georgia was told if they reopened early there’d be a spike in new cases.

Ten’s of thousands of UPS Fedex and USPS workers continued to work in large warehouses during lockdown.

we all went to grocery stores.

still have not met one person I KNOW that knows one person that has even contracted the virus let alone died from it.

Just my personal observations

[MDABE80]

Well the number of cases is not accurate , nor is the deaths attributed to COVID. CDC 's numbers are suspect. Funding is increased to $13.9 K for a COVID DX and if the patient goes on a ventilator it's an extra $39 K in billing. Surely a bias has entered the data...Like one of my janitor's father. He'sd now counted as a COVID death but there's no evidence he had it.


I guess what Im saying is that alot of this data is simply not to be trusted. JP's breakdown is very reasonable but even the "oldsters" information look suspect too. I daily new case rate is falling and it's falling quickly. But, then again, it varies by region. So when Debbie or Tony talk about COVID, they are only as good as their data which is handed to them by others.

And I do agree with JP, that Inslee's activity is a wee bit _______<--- you fill in the blank.
Thanks for the "assist" Mark!!!

[LTownZag]

Well the number of cases is not accurate , nor is the deaths attributed to COVID.

You've called Johns Hopkins the "Gold standard" - they report 90,000 USA deaths as of 5AM this morning.

By what factor are they in error? 10% too high? 20%?

For comparison, the Chair of the Department of Data Science at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Professor of Applied Statistics at Harvard, Prof. Irizarry, suggests we were already undercounting COVID deaths by 21,000 as of April 25 in the "fog of war" of the early outbreak.



(Full story sourced via data from Harvard's Chair of Department of Data Science)

[LTownZag]

Sweden chose another path ....

I recall some on this board predicted huge losses.....even with “stay at home” policy.

Sweden's rate of COVID death is 4x-8x that of similar nearby nations Denmark, Norway, and Finland. Their death rate is even 30% higher than ours in the USA.

I predicted USA deaths would tragically total over 200,000 within a year from when user NEC26 called me alarmist early on and we subsequently placed a public bet for charity, which was in early March.

What case number or death number do you predict by Aug1, Oct 1, or March1?

Does not our current death toll already represent "huge losses"? If not, I'm curious what adjectives you would describe the death totals from September 11th or the Vietnam War.

[Zagceo]

I consider these flu outbreaks to be huge

https://weather.com/health/cold-flu/news/2020-01-31-5-worst-flu-outbreaks-in-recent-history

[MDABE80]

And Hopkins is only as good as the data is what I also said......as it turns out, even the most eyecatching graphs which you readily supply are not accurate either.

Unknowable is the best assessment. 25%-50% off. WHy? bad reporting , bad coding and there is now a bias in the system. You've never done a discharge summary so I wouldn't expect you to know anything but what you're told (media info). It's in the mechanics of how the system works. I don't think we're getting accurate data......most inflated.
I do not know how to correct the system. i wouldn't be hanging on every word though........

[MDABE80]

Sweden's rate of COVID death is 4x-8x that of similar nearby nations Denmark, Norway, and Finland. Their death rate is even 30% higher than ours in the USA.

I predicted USA deaths would tragically total over 200,000 within a year from when user NEC26 called me alarmist early on and we subsequently placed a public bet for charity, which was in early March.

What case number or death number do you predict by Aug1, Oct 1, or March1?

Does not our current death toll already represent "huge losses"? If not, I'm curious what adjectives you would describe the death totals from September 11th or the Vietnam War.

You don't get it even now LTown....you're predictions are inaccurate because of what I posted to day. Read it. You mimic the media stuff picked up. It's inaccurate. Even the medical data is shaky. Nothing personal but you're only as good as what the media is telling you. Hopkins is best but even that may not be accurate. CDC is not...and NIH has quit using CDC as a source.

And now, the DX of COVID is changing. I do think DX has been so loose ( yeilding such high numbers without accuracy) the numbers are shifting. If history proves right, more testing will increase numbers, but the death numbers will drop ( becuase the DX is becoming more rigorous) . It might be good to go back and read JP's numbers. Many will likely has some low titers (but called positive) but few ill die ( as it is now). CDC's numbers are questionable but they're good for something........just know the accuracy is limited.

[MDABE80]

computer modeling used by many countries to shut down was flawed....says this coder.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...tware-mistake/

CEO if we all could go back and read Kitz's post on what he does and what he knows about model, you would soon see why the modeling is inaccurate. Maybe Kitz would be so kind to repost how modeling is really done. He really explains a lot in terms of why the models produced so far cannot be accurate. UW's guy (Fergussen) just out front of the data. WHo knows his motivation but the media ( in their usual silliness) began quoting him like he was THEE authority. He wasn't and isn't..at least so far.

Take a look at Kitz's post. It's really an eyeopener.

[willandi]

I did read somewhere that one of the ways they have been coming up with deaths attributed to Covid is to look at the average number of deaths, per day, in each locale, and the number above that can be attributed, without having a test to actually prove it.
That model only works in larger metropolitan areas where there are enough deaths to be a statistical probability. Small rural towns where there aren't deaths on a regular basis, it doesn't fly. In cities like New York, where the average daily death toll has been 2000 (I picked that number out of the air) for the last 10 years, if the death toll daily becomes 2500, and the primary difference is the virus, the are using that newer figure.
Just something I read.

[scrooner]

Data is mixed but it does look like the number of new cases has been cut in half compared to Early March.

I daily new case rate is falling and it's falling quickly. But, then again, it varies by region.

Asking again: Can you clarify these statements? Where is the drastic reduction in new cases taking place?

[JPtheBeasta]

Asking again: Can you clarify these statements? Where is the drastic reduction in new cases taking place?

Covidtracking.com has a lot of raw data. There is a graph on the main page that shows the increase in cases starting in mid March. Johns Hopkins has graphs of new cases. Cases were very low in March and started to rise then.

If you look around mid March, the percent of tests that were coming back positive were in the 15% ballpark, and now they are coming in at 5-6%. (Daily new cases/daily tests)

[LTownZag]

I consider these flu outbreaks to be huge

https://weather.com/health/cold-flu/...recent-history

Then it would be consistent to consider COVID-19 losses as huge as well. In 10 weeks it has killed as many ( or more ) Americans than 3 of the 5 famous influenza outbreaks at your link. (1957, 1968 Hong Kong, and recent H1N1)

It would obviously be unreasonable to consider those multi year events and their death totals as huge, while downplaying already similar deaths over just 3 months despite for greater mitigation.

[LTownZag]

And Hopkins is only as good as the data is what I also said......as it turns out, even the most eyecatching graphs which you readily supply are not accurate either.

Unknowable is the best assessment. 25%-50% off. WHy? bad reporting , bad coding and there is now a bias in the system. You've never done a discharge summary so I wouldn't expect you to know anything but what you're told (media info). It's in the mechanics of how the system works. I don't think we're getting accurate data......most inflated.
I do not know how to correct the system. i wouldn't be hanging on every word though........

Abe, I’ll accept your premise that domestic covid deaths are officially overcounted by 25-50%.

You would then need to explain what’s causing all the tens of thousands of excess respiratory related deaths from the past 8 weeks among a demographic group identical to those we know from tests had covid-19 and died.


Either you are saying USA (and Belgium's and Spain's and Italy's, etc) total deaths numbers are being faked, these tens of thousands of people are still alive, or else you’d need to explain, if not covid, why so many more people than the last few March or Aprils have died.

[MDABE80]

Sorry LT. I just think they’re wrong. Overly enthusiastic. Media driven....perhaps ? It’s. Big ball of cht!