Covid has to start running out of gas soon.

If I was to argue we are close to the end, I would lean more on the number of infections needed for herd immunity than IFR. A reasonable model came up with 43%, although as mentioned above, some real world examples had a higher percentage. Certainly social/cultural factors are big here (the more uniformly people socialize, the closer the number is to 70%)

2600 bro wrote:

0.26% doesn't really tell the whole story. COVID is more than significantly worse compared to other seasonal respiratory viruses.

https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1336841338923278336?s=20

You try looking into those numbers? First, the ranges are huge (6 or more levels of magnitude difference). Second, cross reference some of the assumed values against documented values. For the 0-24 age group, it is estimating we should have on the order of 42% excess deaths at a 100% infection rate(If you cross against SS administration actuarial death tables). Conservatively estimating a 30% infection rate at this point, we should have 12% excess deaths in that age group. The reality is we have 0 excess deaths in that age group. So either we are at a 0% infection rate, or the numbers in your graph that you are holding out as evidence are completely fabricated.

Lets go on to the 25-44 year old age group. Your chart says that at a 100% rate of infection, we would expect about 50% excess deaths. The CDC tells us we have about 7% excess deaths in that age group (most of which can be attributed to deaths of despair at this point, but I digress), which would indicate by your charts that we are at an infection point of 14%, which is closer to a CFR than an IFR value at this point (unless you believe that all actual cases have been logged and that there are no asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases that were not accounted for). By the way, the IFR you are holding to in your charts for this age group (average of 0.09% ) is about 7 times greater than the CFR for the US Military at this point (15 deaths out of 120,106 cases).

Continuing this exercise, here is what the current excess deaths would indicate when crossed against SS death tables.

Age Group Excess deaths at 100% inf. Actual Excess deaths Indicated Infection Rate

45-64 77.44% 9.52% 12.3%

65-74 94.49% 20% 21.1%

75-84 89.54% 23.08% 25.8%

85+ 80.60% 11.11% 13.8%

When you get into those upper age groups, it is disingenuous to attribute all of those deaths to COVID at it neglects to acknowledge all of the other conditions an individual has acquired over their life. Using the Social Security actuarial death tables, the chance of a person over 90 dying in a given year is 19.98% even without COVID, the chance of a person between 80-89 dying in a given year is 10.33%.

Since covid-19 is mutating and likely current covid-19 vaccinations will have weaker effects on mutations, there will be some re-infections. Viral load is relevant. If one only suffered mild symptoms from being covid-19 positive, do not expect one year immunity. Covid-19 will circle globe a few more years with deadly results.

the truth ... wrote:

Since covid-19 is mutating and likely current covid-19 vaccinations will have weaker effects on mutations, there will be some re-infections. Viral load is relevant. If one only suffered mild symptoms from being covid-19 positive, do not expect one year immunity. Covid-19 will circle globe a few more years with deadly results.

It generally mutates slowly(much slower than flu) although there is a concern of it residing long-term in the immunocompromised, and mutating into a significantly different form there. This is a big reason for wanting our vaccines to prevent transmission as well as protect the individual. The immunocompromise likely will not have a good response to the vaccine, so we would need herd immunity to prevent them from getting infected and presenting an opportunity for those dramatic mutations (antigenic shift vs antigenic drift)

joedirtty wrote:

Age Group Excess deaths at 100% inf. Actual Excess deaths Indicated Infection Rate

45-64 77.44% 9.52% 12.3%

65-74 94.49% 20% 21.1%

75-84 89.54% 23.08% 25.8%

85+ 80.60% 11.11% 13.8%

When you get into those upper age groups, it is disingenuous to attribute all of those deaths to COVID at it neglects to acknowledge all of the other conditions an individual has acquired over their life. Using the Social Security actuarial death tables, the chance of a person over 90 dying in a given year is 19.98% even without COVID, the chance of a person between 80-89 dying in a given year is 10.33%.

Exactly! The good rule of thumb is that a COVID infection roughly doubles your risk of death for the year and that is what your numbers estimating excess at 100% infection confirm!

The narrative was written long ago.

2600 bro wrote:

0.26% doesn't really tell the whole story.

Bro...it's almost TWICE AS BAD as something 0% of people ever worry about.

the truth ... wrote:

Since covid-19 is mutating and likely current covid-19 vaccinations will have weaker effects on mutations, there will be some re-infections. Viral load is relevant. If one only suffered mild symptoms from being covid-19 positive, do not expect one year immunity. Covid-19 will circle globe a few more years with deadly results.

SCIENCE says otherwise.

Math genius wrote:

2600 bro wrote:

0.26% doesn't really tell the whole story.

Bro...it's almost TWICE AS BAD as something 0% of people ever worry about.

Except as I pointed out above that 0.26% has horrible sourcing. It comes from a tertiary source and if you looked at the primary, you would NEVER say 0.26%..

Joe later refers to Iceland, but when you actually look at Iceland now, the best guess is 0.49%. We wouldn’t want to use the top or bottom of the range here, because that would suggest that we just chose a country with small numbers, with the ensuing large error bars.

So this gives an estimate of over 1.1 million dead if 70% would have needed to be infected or over 700000 if only 43%(probably less likely) needed to be infected to reach herd immunity without a vaccine.

Lost of spinning to make something that is bad seem "not so bad." But hey I'll take "not so bad" over "fake virus." "Completely fabricated" - indication of no bias from Mr. Dirtty at all. For young people, various restrictions have led to less commuting / work from home and less traffic and other accident deaths. You have some nice math but for the younger groups where the raw # of COVID deaths are small I would be wary of looking at excess deaths as a measure of IFR since you are much more likely to see compensation and washout from other effects over the past year.

Harambe wrote:

joedirtty wrote:

Age Group Excess deaths at 100% inf. Actual Excess deaths Indicated Infection Rate

45-64 77.44% 9.52% 12.3%

65-74 94.49% 20% 21.1%

75-84 89.54% 23.08% 25.8%

85+ 80.60% 11.11% 13.8%

When you get into those upper age groups, it is disingenuous to attribute all of those deaths to COVID at it neglects to acknowledge all of the other conditions an individual has acquired over their life. Using the Social Security actuarial death tables, the chance of a person over 90 dying in a given year is 19.98% even without COVID, the chance of a person between 80-89 dying in a given year is 10.33%.

Exactly! The good rule of thumb is that a COVID infection roughly doubles your risk of death for the year and that is what your numbers estimating excess at 100% infection confirm!

More accurate estimates can be found here in Youyang Gu's site.https://covid19-projections.com/ His estimate is 75M have been infected and my guess is that a significant fraction of those infected in March/April have waning immunity. How waning is unknown. Toss in new strains that may partially (or entirely evade) the immune response....

Math Genius wrote:

Tough to find a current CDC estimate of total infections, but as of September they were guessing that 1 in 7 cases were being reported.

Use that same multiplier at current known case levels, and it brings us to 157.5 million infections. That's about half of the US population. Current high-end estimates are that 85% of the country will need to be immune for true HI to kick in, but cases numbers should begin to decline well before that.

With no evidence of widespread reinfection, and vaccinations ramping up quickly (currently about 3% has had a dose, with more widespread inoculation coming in the next few weeks), Covid has to start running out of gas in the not-so-distant future.

So, to summarize several posters: Please stop claiming .26%. It doesn't hold up.

And even if you reach herd immunity, once a more contagious variant of a disease becomes widespread, the herd no longer has herd immunity.

real info wrote:

So, to summarize several posters: Please stop claiming .26%. It doesn't hold up.

And even if you reach herd immunity, once a more contagious variant of a disease becomes widespread, the herd no longer has herd immunity.

Yes.

We are still under assault of the Spanish flu.

These things just never go away

I will add that id

Accidentally hit post. I will add that if transmission, not just symptoms are prevented, then mutation concern goes way down



After finding the following quote in the New England Journal I am certainly feeling better about the Moderna Vaccine (and almost certainly the Pfizer vaccine)reducing spread

in addition to symptomatic Covid-19 cases 39 (0.3%) in the placebo group and 15 (0.1%) in the mRNA-1273 group had nasopharyngeal swabs that were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR at the second dose visit (surveillance swab) but had no evidence of Covid-19 symptoms (Table S18).

https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2035389

It is coming from a nasal swab, that means that mucosal immunity is being addressed. And note this is only after 1 injection, so the immune system was far from reaching its full response. i think Harambe might have referred to this, but I didn't fully understand the context until reading the article.

The study is ongoing, but those are very encouraging preliminary results

--

Timothy Clark

After finding the following quote in the New England Journal I am certainly feeling better about the Moderna Vaccine (and almost certainly the Pfizer vaccine) reducing spread

in addition to symptomatic Covid-19 cases 39 (0.3%) in the placebo group and 15 (0.1%) in the mRNA-1273 group had nasopharyngeal swabs that were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR at the second dose visit (surveillance swab) but had no evidence of Covid-19 symptoms (Table S18).

https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2035389

If it is coming from a nasal swab, that means that mucosal immunity is being addressed. And note this is only after 1 injection, so the immune system was far from reaching its full response. i think Harambe might have referred to this, but I didn't fully understand the context until reading the article.

trashcan wrote:

in addition to symptomatic Covid-19 cases 39 (0.3%) in the placebo group and 15 (0.1%) in the mRNA-1273 group had nasopharyngeal swabs that were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR at the second dose visit (surveillance swab) but had no evidence of Covid-19 symptoms (Table S18).

Yes this is great confirmation.

The only way to run COVID out of gas is to vaccinate ASAP

So the NBA can chill out?