The US is still in the exponential growth phase and there’s no reas to expect the curvature to reverse for at least another week, maybe more. This is getting a whole lot worse before it gets better. Protect your families.
Of course it has not been bad at all yet.
old math professor wrote:It seems to me that we are getting about 3000 new cases per day. Seems more linear than exponential to me.
No idea where you are getting that nonsensical idea, over the last 10 days the daily change in reported confirmed cases has been 382, 516, 548, 772, 1133, 1789, 1362, 5894, 5423, 6389. That represents an average daily change of 35%, although with noise in the data, the daily change has swung between 21% and 76%.
As a math professor, you should be more careful with numbers. This is an alarming situation, and putting a happy spin on the numbers, lulling people to believe it's better than it is, if it influences just one stupid LRC reader to avoid social distancing, has a real chance of causing someone's sickness and possible death.
An important side note is that each day the number of infected people around you, many of whom may be asymptomatic, is growing exponentially, thus increases your chance of contacting the disease exponentially.
This is no joke, no fake news, not something to be taken lightly. Do better next time.
the idiot wrote:
[quote]old math professor wrote:It seems to me that we are getting about 3000 new cases per day. Seems more linear than exponential to me.
No idea where you are getting that nonsensical idea, over the last 10 days the daily change in reported confirmed cases has been 382, 516, 548, 772, 1133, 1789, 1362, 5894, 5423, 6389. That represents an average daily change of 35%, although with noise in the data, the daily change has swung between 21% and 76%.
We need a plot of the number of corona tests done daily in that period for the numbers to mean anything
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Valuations do matter, and that was always the point.
I don’t think anyone would disagree with that. The issue has been exactly how much they matter. Valuations have been high for years, yet the markets continually set record highs during that time. It wasn’t until the pandemic surfaced that the markets took a nosedive. Clearly the coronavirus has been the catalyst for the current market woes.
I disagree with it. Valuations do not matter.
What matters in any particular situation is interested people’s attitudes toward the valuation, particularly whether the valuation matters or not to them, and if they think it matters to other relevant people.
Email came that someone at Mrs Maserati’s workplace had contact with someone who tested positive. It’s working its way through the population. Still don’t actually know anyone who has tested positive.
Giles Corey wrote:We need a plot of the number of corona tests done daily in that period for the numbers to mean anything
Nonsense. You're a denialist sociopath also.
If we look at the daily change in fatalities, we get: 40, 47, 54, 63, 85, 108, 118, 200, 244 and 307 for the last ten days. This reflects an average daily change of 26%.
You, by dragging your feet and making this less than it is with loose facts and feelings, are contributing to people dying. Someone, or someones, in your network of connections will almost surely die from CV-19, and you have the chance to be a part of trying to prevent that, or standing by and encouraging it.
Best of luck to you and yours.
the idiot wrote:
Giles Corey wrote:We need a plot of the number of corona tests done daily in that period for the numbers to mean anything
Nonsense. You're a denialist sociopath also.
If we look at the daily change in fatalities, we get: 40, 47, 54, 63, 85, 108, 118, 200, 244 and 307 for the last ten days. This reflects an average daily change of 26%.
You, by dragging your feet and making this less than it is with loose facts and feelings, are contributing to people dying. Someone, or someones, in your network of connections will almost surely die from CV-19, and you have the chance to be a part of trying to prevent that, or standing by and encouraging it.
Best of luck to you and yours.
It would seem that number of tests is somewhat relevant. Really don’t think it makes one a sociopath.
Crooked Hillary wrote:It would seem that number of tests is somewhat relevant. Really don’t think it makes one a sociopath.
You are completely wrong and also, evidently, ignorant or a sociopath.
The number of tests completed is important to understand the actual prevalence of infections in the population, for sure. But as a base assumption, if the availability of tests is relatively constant (an imperfect assumption), then the exponential increase in reported cases reflects an exponential increase in true cases (which are probably under reported by a significant margin). The only way this is untrue is if testing is increasing at an exponential rate, which is laughably incredible.
Fatalities data are a much better indicator, since they are "real" or relatively complete. Unfortunately they are a lagging indicator. The number of fatalities today in the US (over 300) represents about 100x that many actual infections (over 30,000) about 1-2 weeks ago. If 30,000 has been growing exponentially for 1-2 weeks at 25-30% per day, actual cases in the US today are somewhere in the range of 150,000 to 700,000, meaning that as of today there are about 1500 to 7000 people who've contracted a fatal dose of CV-19 and we will see that number of fatalities in the next 1-2 weeks. That number will continue to grow unless / until jacka$$es stop foot dragging and get serious.
the idiot wrote:
Crooked Hillary wrote:It would seem that number of tests is somewhat relevant. Really don’t think it makes one a sociopath.
You are completely wrong and also, evidently, ignorant or a sociopath.
The number of tests completed is important to understand the actual prevalence of infections in the population, for sure. But as a base assumption, if the availability of tests is relatively constant (an imperfect assumption), then the exponential increase in reported cases reflects an exponential increase in true cases (which are probably under reported by a significant margin). The only way this is untrue is if testing is increasing at an exponential rate, which is laughably incredible.
Fatalities data are a much better indicator, since they are "real" or relatively complete. Unfortunately they are a lagging indicator. The number of fatalities today in the US (over 300) represents about 100x that many actual infections (over 30,000) about 1-2 weeks ago. If 30,000 has been growing exponentially for 1-2 weeks at 25-30% per day, actual cases in the US today are somewhere in the range of 150,000 to 700,000, meaning that as of today there are about 1500 to 7000 people who've contracted a fatal dose of CV-19 and we will see that number of fatalities in the next 1-2 weeks. That number will continue to grow unless / until jacka$$es stop foot dragging and get serious.
I’ve complied with all instructions to limit exposure. That doesn’t keep me from also questioning (yes, ignorantly because I truly don’t know) if the cure is worse than the disease.
Throwing millions of people out of work has some pretty devastating consequences of its own.
Your name calling really isn’t that productive, in my opinion.
Crooked Hillary wrote:Your name calling really isn’t that productive, in my opinion.
Be that as it may... this is an extraordinary situation that demands that people be made to snap out of it and get with the program. I'm following the lead of an epidemiological nurse in another thread who suggested that aggressive ridicule aimed at deniers and foot draggers is needed.
Maserati wrote:Email came that someone at Mrs Maserati’s workplace had contact with someone who tested positive. It’s working its way through the population. Still don’t actually know anyone who has tested positive.
mas, the important reality here is that the potential for exposure is growing exponentially, and our belief about potential exposure (i.e., understanding of the number of infected people in the population) lags (exponentially) in time.
the idiot wrote:
[quote]Giles Corey wrote:We need a plot of the number of corona tests done daily in that period for the numbers to mean anything
Nonsense. You're a denialist sociopath also.
If we look at the daily change in fatalities, we get: 40, 47, 54, 63, 85, 108, 118, 200, 244 and 307 for the last ten days. This reflects an average daily change of 26%.
Yes. You are the idiot. I was responding to the following comment:
No idea where you are getting that nonsensical idea, over the last 10 days the daily change in reported confirmed cases has been 382, 516, 548, 772, 1133, 1789, 1362, 5894, 5423, 6389. That represents an average daily change of 35%, although with noise in the data, the daily change has swung between 21% and 76%.
Daily changes in reported number of cases without the changes in the number of tests being done are useless.
Number of deaths is a completely different metric.
Dunno if you are being dishonest or just dumb
You’re stepping pretty far up that moral pedestal, idiot.
This is the strong many making huge sacrifices for the weak few. What huge sacrifices? Their job, their freedom, their wealth, their entire way of life. Even if this doesn’t last more than say 4 months, irreparable damage can be done, affecting their entire lives moving forward. How many failures to launch will this create, who knows. Not all of them agree with the popular moral position, perhaps even a majority of them disagree.
It does not make them axxholes or ignorant or stupid. Many are now struggling to find ways to express themselves within the acceptable moral framework, which contradiction leads sometimes to nonsensical and illogical statements.
Listen to what they mean, rather than to what they are saying. Go deeper. Am I just making assumptions? No, it’s more than that. Listening to what you don’t want to hear can be tough.
the idiot wrote:
Maserati wrote:Email came that someone at Mrs Maserati’s workplace had contact with someone who tested positive. It’s working its way through the population. Still don’t actually know anyone who has tested positive.
mas, the important reality here is that the potential for exposure is growing exponentially, and our belief about potential exposure (i.e., understanding of the number of infected people in the population) lags (exponentially) in time.
How many times can you use the word exponentially in one sentence?
Do you know what it means?
the idiot wrote:
Crooked Hillary wrote:Your name calling really isn’t that productive, in my opinion.
Be that as it may... this is an extraordinary situation that demands that people be made to snap out of it and get with the program. I'm following the lead of an epidemiological nurse in another thread who suggested that aggressive ridicule aimed at deniers and foot draggers is needed.
Btw I don’t think that’s a lead worth following.
the idiot wrote:
Crooked Hillary wrote:Your name calling really isn’t that productive, in my opinion.
I'm following the lead of an epidemiological nurse in another thread who suggested that aggressive ridicule aimed at deniers and foot draggers is needed.
lol yeah that's definitely the way to do it. rhetoric 101 right there for persuasive arguing.
Pro-tip : a little less fanaticism and a little more pragmatism would go a long way.
the idiot wrote:
Maserati wrote:Email came that someone at Mrs Maserati’s workplace had contact with someone who tested positive. It’s working its way through the population. Still don’t actually know anyone who has tested positive.
mas, the important reality here is that the potential for exposure is growing exponentially, and our belief about potential exposure (i.e., understanding of the number of infected people in the population) lags (exponentially) in time.
Yes those assertions seem true enough, but miss the bigger picture.
Even if all of our current measures were great, if this isn’t almost completely eradicated before there is any kind of cure or vaccine, it could very likely engender exponential growth once again. What success means in this situation really has to be considered thoughtfully, relative to the cost.
the CDC has estimated (based on weekly influenza surveillance data) that at least 12,000 people have died from influenza between Oct. 1, 2019 through Feb. 1, 2020, and the number of deaths may be as high as 30,000.
The CDC also estimates that up to 31 million Americans have caught the flu this season, with 210,000 to 370,000 flu sufferers hospitalized because of the virus.
The number of drug overdose deaths decreased by 4% from 2017 to 2018, but the number of drug overdose deaths was still four times higher in 2018 than in 1999.1 Nearly 70% of the 67,367 deaths in 2018 involved an opioid. From 2017 to 2018, there were significant changes in opioid-involved death rates:
So we are looking at @ 100,000 American deaths per year from flu and drug overdoses.
Let's hope that the coronavirus (which has killed 13,000 plus people worldwide so far) kills nowhere near as many Americans as these other two scourges that get little media hype.
Maserati wrote:You’re stepping pretty far up that moral pedestal, idiot.
Yes, and intentionally slow.
You evidently knew my > 30 years ago, although I don't know how well. And you knew others like me. So you'll have some sense of the analytical powers I would have been able to muster in my youth. I'm a lot older now, possibly senile. I have spent a considerable amount of my mental energy, drawing on the depths of my remaining brain cells, over the past few weeks immersing myself in the available data. Kindly assign whatever weight you deem appropriate to the alarm I'm trying to sound.
That's all I'll offer on the subject in this thread and let it rest. I've done what I can.
the idiot wrote:
Crooked Hillary wrote:Your name calling really isn’t that productive, in my opinion.
Be that as it may... this is an extraordinary situation that demands that people be made to snap out of it and get with the program. I'm following the lead of an epidemiological nurse in another thread who suggested that aggressive ridicule aimed at deniers and foot draggers is needed.
Yes. Belittle those who do not blindly buy into the establishment narrative.
That's how it is always done.