dunes runner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Sometimes recessions aren't short-lived. We have never seen the global economy come to an overnight standstill brought about by a health crisis of these proportions. We don't know where this is all going to lead.
The new world order has long wanted the world population reduced to 500 million people, so that should give you some clue.
Something else that has originated in your brain.
Here is a group we can easily watch for infection rates. Military people function in tight quarters.
With all this exponential growth , and a much worse than flu virus, why aren't more military people in San Diego horribly sick? The civilians they interact with and the elderly people they interact with?
With incubation rates, why haven't the people who got these people sick also infected a lot more than the low number of cases in San Diego Counties 3 million plus population?
On average 7,883 died every day in the US in 2019. That is all causes combined.
On average 1,766 died every day in Italy in 2019. Again, all causes combined.
I figure those are a couple numbers to keep in mind when looking at the deaths caused each day by covid-19.
Crowd Sorcerer wrote:
On average 7,883 died every day in the US in 2019. That is all causes combined.
On average 1,766 died every day in Italy in 2019. Again, all causes combined.
I figure those are a couple numbers to keep in mind when looking at the deaths caused each day by covid-19.
So in Italy there were 627 deaths from covid-19 yesterday. That's about 36% of the average number of daily deaths. In the US in would be the equivalent of 2,683 deaths in a day from covid-19. That sounds pretty bad to me.
BTW I used 7,452 for the average number of deaths in the US.
The BBC has a 'reasonable' article mentioning some of these issues with the stats...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654
As it mentions in the UK, 500,000 people die every year anyway. These need to be factored in, to figure how many extra folk die.
Naturally, we don't want any extra deaths. The main thing to me though, is trying to make the health services manage ok.
sp2 wrote:
agip wrote:
funny you said that - the world (excluding iran italy and spain) had a very good day even as Italy and Spain had an awful day.
The world death totals for non I-I-S countries was only 315. Vs. 311 the prior day. A 1% growth rate. We should be happy about that. While acknowledging that it is just one day.
From another thread:
very bad day in the big 3: very large increase of deaths.
I'll pick out a couple of pieces of more positive news tho.
In the big 3 the only positive is that in Iran daily deaths had their third straight day of the same count. I hope they are submitting accurate data.
The only other positive I see in today's data is that *outside* the big 3, deaths had a surprisingly light day. 315, vs 311 the day prior. Just a 1% growth rate.
In the past I have been talking about how the numbers from the big 3 were improving...today it flipped and the big 3 were awful but the rest of the world was surprisingly safe.
But that's just one day and each day can see wide variation. The hope is that countries that don't tip into Iran, Italy, Spain spirals can get through this ok. I hope national shutdowns and higher test levels will keep the rest of the world from Italy-Spain-Iran status.
Hope didn't work today in Italy and Spain.
On to tomorrow.
Yes, your silly theory failed quite impressively today. (Maybe cuz you really need more than two or three days of data to infer very much.)
Total deaths up 13% today. The rate of increase continues to climb.
The funny thing is you might *almost* be onto something sensible, but your focus is wrong.
Wigins, of course --being an absolute moron-- has it completely *backwards* as usual.
He says Italy should be *ignored*. This, naturally, is because it exposes his pet 'theories' as stunningly wrong and stupid. (But that keeps happening regardless of Italy, or any other particular country.)
You, at least, sort of *partly* have the right idea, to *focus* on Italy because it's clearly the best model for what's happening here --and here will probably be the best model for what happens in much of the rest of the world. (Spain being probably the next best. Iran, who knows? No one seems to know how much trust can be put in their numbers.)
So, yeah, since Italy's clearly the key *test-case*, now, to figure out how the US and the rest of the world is likely to go, you're right to focus attention on it and do exactly the opposite of what the moron Wigins suggests.
The problem is you really shouldn't be focusing on the deaths, but rather on the growth-rate of new cases. The death will shake out wherever it does. Whether it turns out to be 0.2% as the moron Wigins claims (it won't), or 4%, as most actual *evidence* suggests, or somewhere in-between, it's still gonna be a global catastrophe if it infects 3 billion people.
If it 'only' ends up hitting 10 million, it *won't* be the end of the world, even though it'll still be scary as hell.
The ultimate infection-rate is what will be decisive.
It *does* appear, more and more, that the spread really *has* been shut down in China, Japan, and SK. (Which again, is the *opposite* of what the moron Wigins claims in his latest desperate attempt to distract from his amazing string of ongoing stupidity.)
As you said (yes, I'm actually *agreeing* with you on an essential point), the big *test* now is whether Italy can flatten it out as those places did. If it does happen there, it'll be a very strong indication that the US and the rest of the world might have a decent chance to do the same --in spite of the amazing incompetence and stupidity with which we've handled it all up till now.
(And yeah, the same is true for Spain, which appears to be on a very similar track to the Italian one --just a little bit behind it.)
Both of those places show death-rates which are *horrifying* -and it's pretty clear a lot of that's from their medical systems getting swamped by a huge flood of cases in a short time.
Nothing's gonna stop the continued deaths of lots of the people stuck in that awful pipeline, so what really matters in the bigger picture is whether that flood of cases will peak, and subside, sometime soon.
The growth-rate appears to be dropping, in both those places, though it's still too high to look anything less than terrifying right now.
A few more days of data (a week will likely make it pretty clear) should tell us whether those growth-curves are, in fact, actually flattening like they did in China and SK.
If it happens, we'll have reason to believe the same thing may happen here in a few weeks more, and that will be the first real cause for a little bit of optimism to creep in to this catastrophe.
If it doesn't, all bets are probably off, no matter what fantasies Wigins and other idiots may peddle about 'vanishing' death-rates.
um, glad we agree? Strange that we are coming to the same conclusion but you are against my methods.
But anyway, I have been ignoring cases because cases are completely dependent on testing, and testing is completely apples to oranges around the world, every country has different standards on who is being tested, etc. I read (not confirmed) that some countries test bodies after dying and some don't. I'm sure there is poor data reporting from many hospitals.
I mean I agree completely that if cases went down that would be a good sign. But there are just so many variables on cases. Fewer variables on deaths.
That's my reasoning anyway.
tropic of cancer wrote:
Crowd Sorcerer wrote:
On average 7,883 died every day in the US in 2019. That is all causes combined.
On average 1,766 died every day in Italy in 2019. Again, all causes combined.
I figure those are a couple numbers to keep in mind when looking at the deaths caused each day by covid-19.
So in Italy there were 627 deaths from covid-19 yesterday. That's about 36% of the average number of daily deaths. In the US in would be the equivalent of 2,683 deaths in a day from covid-19. That sounds pretty bad to me.
How many of those 627 deaths in Italy are attributable solely to covid 19?
How many would have died anyway?
According to analysis in Italy, 99.2% had at least 1 severe underlying illness, 75% had 2. The average age at death was 80. The top 3 underlying illnesses were heart condition, diabetes and cancer.
Did that 80 year old with cancer and a heart condition just die as a result of covid 19? How long would he have lived anyway?
Have the benefits of the savings in healthcare costs of someone with severe underlying illnesses dying a few months earlier been taken into account by governments?
The UK's strategy was stupid. That's all I have to say on that.
after thinking about it, not testing bodies after they are dead is also fouling up the death numbers I use. I still think they are more reliable than case numbers, but lagging.
Anyway, I desperately need some good news so here it is: Iran's death count fell 17% today. 123 today vs 149 yesterday. If they are reporting data correctly, that's great news - the curve on iran has continued to form. They tend to report just one set of numbers each day and not update.
today's US deaths. Those killed seem to have underlying health conditions.
1st death in Tennessee: a 73-year old man with underlying health conditions in Nashville [source]
1st death in Arizona: a Maricopa County man in his 50s with underlying health conditions [source]
1 death in Ohio: an 85-year-old man was an Erie County [source]
2 new deaths in South Carolina: elderly people suffering from underlying health conditions [source]
1 death in California: the first death in Contra Costa County: a patient in their 70s [source]
1 death in Maryland: a Baltimore County resident in his 60s who suffered from underlying medical conditions [source] D.C. schools will be closed until April 27
1 death in Missouri: a woman in her 60s, who suffered from multiple health problems prior to being diagnosed with COVID-19 [source]
slippery sloper wrote:
today's US deaths. Those killed seem to have underlying health conditions.
1st death in Tennessee: a 73-year old man with underlying health conditions in Nashville [source]
1st death in Arizona: a Maricopa County man in his 50s with underlying health conditions [source]
1 death in Ohio: an 85-year-old man was an Erie County [source]
2 new deaths in South Carolina: elderly people suffering from underlying health conditions [source]
1 death in California: the first death in Contra Costa County: a patient in their 70s [source]
1 death in Maryland: a Baltimore County resident in his 60s who suffered from underlying medical conditions [source] D.C. schools will be closed until April 27
1 death in Missouri: a woman in her 60s, who suffered from multiple health problems prior to being diagnosed with COVID-19 [source]
Interesting info - do you have a link for that? (is this posted daily as the information on the patients becomes available?).
.
Reality and Truth wrote:
tropic of cancer wrote:
So in Italy there were 627 deaths from covid-19 yesterday. That's about 36% of the average number of daily deaths. In the US in would be the equivalent of 2,683 deaths in a day from covid-19. That sounds pretty bad to me.
How many of those 627 deaths in Italy are attributable solely to covid 19?
How many would have died anyway?
According to analysis in Italy, 99.2% had at least 1 severe underlying illness, 75% had 2. The average age at death was 80. The top 3 underlying illnesses were heart condition, diabetes and cancer.
Did that 80 year old with cancer and a heart condition just die as a result of covid 19? How long would he have lived anyway?
Have the benefits of the savings in healthcare costs of someone with severe underlying illnesses dying a few months earlier been taken into account by governments?
Yes, the Nazis did.
not sure why people are still engaging with bad wigins, facts matter, et. al.
like two weeks ago weren't they saying the USA probably wouldn't see 2,600 cases total? that hospitals would have to flip a coin for a case?
now the usa has 5,700 cases in a single day?
the little boys are just moving the goalposts and everyone is following them down the field. they were already egregiously, deeply wrong about the whole situation. they no longer have credibility. once our death toll gets up just wait, they'll start citing how many people die of heart disease each year to argue that it isn't that bad because it's still less than that.
birdbeard wrote:
not sure why people are still engaging with bad wigins, facts matter, et. al.
like two weeks ago weren't they saying the USA probably wouldn't see 2,600 cases total? that hospitals would have to flip a coin for a case?
now the usa has 5,700 cases in a single day?
the little boys are just moving the goalposts and everyone is following them down the field. they were already egregiously, deeply wrong about the whole situation. they no longer have credibility. once our death toll gets up just wait, they'll start citing how many people die of heart disease each year to argue that it isn't that bad because it's still less than that.
And in the meantime, NYC hospitals are starting to run out of ICU beds, LA County recommends no longer testing for virus unless will make a difference in treatment.
USA is following the Italian trajectory, just 10 days behind.
birdbeard wrote:
not sure why people are still engaging with bad wigins, facts matter, et. al.
like two weeks ago weren't they saying the USA probably wouldn't see 2,600 cases total? that hospitals would have to flip a coin for a case?
now the usa has 5,700 cases in a single day?
the little boys are just moving the goalposts and everyone is following them down the field. they were already egregiously, deeply wrong about the whole situation. they no longer have credibility. once our death toll gets up just wait, they'll start citing how many people die of heart disease each year to argue that it isn't that bad because it's still less than that.
+10
tropic of cancer wrote:
Philippines actually had the first death outside of China so they had an early case. Yet in a very densely populated urban area of 25 million with no social distancing the virus has not really spread. We see something similar in Indonesia, India, and other countries.
Probably because the virus is not so contagious like the pundits have been claiming.
So? Is this a big deal? How many kids died of cancer yesterday?
some good facts:
A low probability of catching COVID-19
The World Health Organization (“WHO”) released a study on how China responded to COVID-19. Currently, this study is one of the most exhaustive pieces published on how the virus spreads.
The results of their research show that COVID-19 doesn’t spread as easily as we first thought or the media had us believe (remember people abandoned their dogs out of fear of getting infected). According to their report if you come in contact with someone who tests positive for COVID-19 you have a 1–5% chance of catching it as well. The variability is large because the infection is based on the type of contact and how long.
The majority of viral infections come from prolonged exposures in confined spaces with other infected individuals. Person-to-person and surface contact is by far the most common cause. From the WHO report, “When a cluster of several infected people occurred in China, it was most often (78–85%) caused by an infection within the family by droplets and other carriers of infection in close contact with an infected person.
From the CDC’s study on transmission in China and Princess Cruise outbreak -
A growing body of evidence indicates that COVID-19 transmission is facilitated in confined settings; for example, a large cluster (634 confirmed cases) of COVID-19 secondary infections occurred aboard a cruise ship in Japan, representing about one fifth of the persons aboard who were tested for the virus. This finding indicates the high transmissibility of COVID-19 in enclosed spaces
Dr. Paul Auwaerter, the Clinical Director for the Division of Infectious Diseases at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine echoes this finding,
“If you have a COVID-19 patient in your household, your risk of developing the infection is about 10%….If you were casually exposed to the virus in the workplace (e.g., you were not locked up in conference room for six hours with someone who was infected [like a hospital]), your chance of infection is about 0.5%”
According to Dr. Auwaerter, these transmission rates are very similar to the seasonal flu.
Air-based transmission or untraceable community spread is very unlikely.
https://medium.com/six-four-six-nine/evidence-over-hysteria-covid-19-1b767def5894