She sounds deranged, whoever she is.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/kentucky-resident-tests-positive-covid-032643825.html
She sounds deranged, whoever she is.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/kentucky-resident-tests-positive-covid-032643825.html
Right, I forgot, you have a BS from an R1 and took 400 level biostatistics and epidemiology your senior year. oh wait, that was me. Fun class, btw. Still keep in touch with that professor, crazy cat lady who was on the IRB at the hosp, most difficult "A" I ever earned. we are essentially 12 days behind Italy. Infection numbers are next to useless, and you know it. Fact is we likely have 6-7x people actually infected, vs the known infections. Italy is likely to be closer to 2-4x actual, vs known. Death numbers vs population is a much more informative metric. Frankly, it's about the only accurate metric we have. Thus, some facts: Italy took 12 days to hit 200 deaths/day. They took less than 20 days to hit close to 500 deaths/day. The US took 22 days to break the 200 deaths/day barrier, with a population 5.5 times larger! We also did this while catching them on the infection numbers, which are much less accurate than their own. We did barely more than 1/4 of the tests that italy has conducted, thus we're sampling 1/22nd the proportion of the population that the italians are. Obviously we'd get a LOT more positive tests back if we tested proportionally to italy. You and ever other doomsdayer keep saying "the end is nigh, it's going to be a catastrophe!" (essentially) and yet the known statistics are not playing out the way you claim they will/are. Even the trends are NOT supportive of your claims. So why keep making these claims when you can't back them up with facts?
Kvothe wrote:
our number of infections grew much faster than Italy. The death rate will spike up soon. Learn how exponential curves work.
Yes, more predicting. Keep on predicting, which is not always a bad thing...until you're wrong, every day for over ten days. The modeling has not kept up on the total deaths and that's all I care about. Ozzie, don't worry about the infection rate, i don't give a rats a$$ about that. I couldn't care less about how many people it infects, I care about how many will die and/or suffer irreparable damage. The latter may be more difficult to qualify but the former is hard to miscalculate. As I mentioned above, our death rate is NOT keeping up with italy's, not by a landslide. We're having a fraction of the deaths predicted by kvothe and all the other doomsday prophets. We've been having this fraction of the predicted for about ten days now. It's time to reassess these predictions and bring them in line with reality.
Kvothe wrote:
I found some actual stats. They have models for each state that predict when the peak will occur and when/if hospitals will be overwhelmed. With no action, or even just social distancing the results are frightening.
If testing isn’t widespread, deaths are under reported as well.
Please tell me you're fuggin kidding. I really hope you're not this misled, really man. pray tell, in the atmosphere today where there's screening tents outside EVERY SINGLE ED IN THE COUNTRY, how exactly does a death go unreported? Even those who have died at home have made headlines in newspapers across the country. There are essentially ZERO deaths that are missed, whilst there are 5-7x infections missed for every 1 that is caught by testing. bro, it's kinda difficult to miss the fact that somebody died. You really think there's a legion of people dying and people are saying "well he had a fever, productive bloody cough, and severe SOB, but who knows what it was!" Dude, anything that remotely smells like covid is being labeled as such, so the death numbers are accurate as heck. The infection numbers are not. Can someone tell me if critical thinking is simply dead in this country?
help help fwiw wrote:
If testing isn’t widespread, deaths are under reported as well.
I remind "help help I'm an idiot" who just quoted me that Italy got to the point their hospital system was overrun. They were triaging patients, determining who gets to live and who gets to die. The models I posted predict that happens in any state that doesn't implement shelter in place. No state has done completely nothing, so the worst model won't quite happen anywhere, but I imagine some governor will be stupid enough to ignore reality as his hospitals become overwhelmed. The models don't seem to take into account decrease in capacity from hospital workers getting sick due to not enough ppe either, so that should be considered.
Looks like we'll be sitting around debating this until one state is completely overwhelmed in late april. Then the shelter in place response is going to look really good. I hope my state governor doesn't give into cheetoh mcstupid's idea that the economy can be revved up with the flick of a switch. If a prediction is off, its the one with the crazy suicide stats. I don't think many will be killing themselves over being temporarily out of work due to a major pandemic, especially if state governors and congress come through in getting them assistance.
I'm sad I can't get on my trails and bike paths, but compared to the numbers that could die from this virus, thats a petty sacrifice. Only a basement dweller with no friends or loved ones, a total incel most like, could see the numbers who won't have treatment available for them in a hospital without shelter in place and think that's acceptable loss since they live way out in the mountains or something. Jesus, man, it could be your parents or your brother or sister who doesn't run who needs those hospital beds. It could even be you.
tell ya what. I'll leave this be until late april. At that point, I expect everyone to be overrun (including our small RMC, 164 bed, 6 bed icu + we turned the step-down into overflow covid with another 12 beds) and will issue a mea culpa if so. If you're off, I'll do my best not to gloat, fair enough?
I'm sorry man but I'm just not seeing it. We've barely a few dozen cases here and only one hospitalization (he's stable in icu, should be transferred to step-down in a couple days), no deaths (yet). We're the exception as compared to some metro areas but there's also plenty of metro areas that have very few cases (wasn't Twin Cities around 200 cases? that's basically zero for their population) and won't ever be overrun. Also, would love to see an in depth dive into how many of these patients would have otherwise picked up the flu? without controlling for any variables, it's at least 15% of covid pt's who would likely have picked up the flu and been hospitalized, or worse.
This simply isn't going to have the CFR that everyone wants to predict. Everywhere I turn, the numbers are not supporting this catastrophe that you and so many others are trying to propagate. Doesn't mean I'm not being even more cautious than I normally would but also doesn't mean that I can't think for myself and analyze what data is available, instead of trying to make predictions based of completely different populations (say, italy, spain) and parameters.
And yeah, it could be my parents, and they'd be one floor down from me, what's your point? They'll be in competent hands, with people I'd happily put their lives in- obviously I hope they never show up here unless it's to say hello. I'm not worried about room for them because, based on what we're seeing right now, there's plenty of beds for anyone and everyone. NY and Seattle are aberrations due to crappy travel restrictions (lack thereof- where was trump w/ those travel embargoes when we actually needed them), and most everywhere else is handling their sh**. ok, enough banging my head against this brick wall you tossed up, see you in a month.
In the States you can. So far we can still exercise outside
Stop talking only about the death numbers! Not dying is not the same thing as not having a problem.
Hospitals are already becoming overwhelmed. My sister-in-law works as a pediatric ER doctor in a hospital. The adult hospital next door is drawing on the pediatric docs as they lose personnel to illness, or simply need more doctors. They are running low on masks and equipment.
For most people not visiting hospitals every day, this virus looks like a slight inconvenience that makes you stay inside most of the day. The hospitals are where the cases that do exist get funneled. They are nodes where the enormity of this issue is clearly evident.
If you look at this through the lens of how many deaths, or even just cases are distributed among the entire population of a vast country, it doesn't look so bad, and you will consistently underestimate the problem. If you consider the way the many severe cases that DO exist get concentrated in hospitals -- not the entire nation -- you can see those critical links in our social/medical system reaching the breaking point. That is why we need to take these measures to limit the rapidity of the spread of this illness.
Kvothe wrote:
The only people suggesting opening up the US are those who don't understand statistics and exponential growth. If we do that now, or in 2 weeks, before this has peaked, hospitals will be overrun, many, many more people will die. Italy has "only" had around 7k deaths so far, with less than a 5th the US pop. When we reach the same point of the curve, we'll have over 35k deaths (actually more because the US healthcare system is worse). Without treatment, that number ballons to 70-100k. That is acceptable to people, just so they can go to their fav band's concert or out to eat?
The only way we get the US back open is if everyone is in this together, social distancing to stop the spread.
I understand exponential growth, and have a minor grasp of statistics. I also understand that infection spread is not exponential, except at the very start. It can't be, because at some point the spread rate goes to 0 as everyone is infected.
So it would be helpful if you and everyone else would quit hysterically screaming about "exponential growth".
i'm a leftist and i think guns are good for shooting nazis and other reactionaries who make the mistake of taking up arms against the people. i say more guns for the leftists. The US never gave a hoot about gun control until the black panthers started to get some power
C'mon now, folks. Do we really need multiple pages of discussion about the pros and cons of the philosophical insights of Julia Webb, wife of a former middle-distance star? I mean seriously, who cares what she thinks one way or the other? She's not in any way relevant to the debate. If she didn't happen to be married to Alan Webb, her comments would have gone completely unremarked-upon. And since being married to Alan Webb doesn't give her any added insight into how to deal with the coronavirus, her comments should have stayed unremarked-upon.
It's difficult enough sorting through all the stuff from people with actual knowledge about viruses and pandemics and national hospital infrastructure. No sense wasting extra effort going over the babblings of some B-grade Jenny McCarthy.
pearson wrote:
Kvothe wrote:
(eeek)
I understand exponential growth, and have a minor grasp of statistics. I also understand that infection spread is not exponential, except at the very start. It can't be, because at some point the spread rate goes to 0 as everyone is infected.
So it would be helpful if you and everyone else would quit hysterically screaming about "exponential growth".
Bingo. Although strictly speaking the growth is exponential if you choose to describe it that way, only the exponent inevitably drops toward -inf.
The US growth chart is already reliably tracing out a bellish curve, approaching the peak, with new case #'s over the past 4 days of 10.6k, 9.9, and 12.0k. That's 6% average daily growth in the amount of new cases. Currently it looks on track to level off at 14k, then should inevitably trend back down.
Maximize the chart on the lower right and click the "daily increase" tab.
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6Viral facts. wrote:
let the economists speak wrote:
Isn't it being hypocritical to be Pro-Life, but when it comes to the elderly "Let them die"?
Also, there's probably epidemiologists and economists who have calculated the costs-benefits of all of this, which is why most of the world has shut down.
She isn't saying "let them die", she'd citing the demographic. How many people die every DAY in the US in the 70+ demographic ? Look it up.
Your logic is flawed beyond reason.
Let’s say Coevett rapes and kills 10 people per year.
Then along comes Bad Wiggins and he starts raping and killing people.
You: It’s okay for Bad Wiggins to rape and kill because Coevett does it too.
It’s DOES not matter how many people die from fly or old age. What matters is that we can save lives by controlling the speed of the spread. And for information, not everyone who dies from COVID-19 is over 80...
The US cases will exceed China. Just sayin.
pearson wrote:
I understand exponential growth, and have a minor grasp of statistics. I also understand that infection spread is not exponential, except at the very start. It can't be, because at some point the spread rate goes to 0 as everyone is infected.
So it would be helpful if you and everyone else would quit hysterically screaming about "exponential growth".
So your argument is that it can't be exponential growth because everyone will be infected soon, so we should quit being hysterical?
webby wrote:
pearson wrote:
I understand exponential growth, and have a minor grasp of statistics. I also understand that infection spread is not exponential, except at the very start. It can't be, because at some point the spread rate goes to 0 as everyone is infected.
So it would be helpful if you and everyone else would quit hysterically screaming about "exponential growth".
So your argument is that it can't be exponential growth because everyone will be infected soon, so we should quit being hysterical?
Not at all; my argument is that you should quit hysterically screaming things are wrong. It's fine to scream hysterically about logistic growth.
Wishful thinking to think that we aren’t missing any deaths attributed to coronavirus. We just got tests two weeks ago. What happens if a person died from coronavirus before they were tested for it? It gets coded as a flu or respiratory death. Especially with a test kit shortage, you certainly aren’t going to “waste” a test on someone who is already dead.
In fact, the US government already admitted that deaths were likely missed and recorded as flu deaths before we had full scale testing.
It’s not rocket science. If you don’t test for coronavirus, you don’t know know if they died from it.
Please stop making predictions. You are already a clown, but now you’re giving everyone free hits. For you my friend, it’s better to be theoretically wrong than tangibly wrong. No way 14k was ever going to be the peak.
not my real name wrote:
Please tell me you're fuggin kidding. I really hope you're not this misled, really man.
pray tell, in the atmosphere today where there's screening tents outside EVERY SINGLE ED IN THE COUNTRY, how exactly does a death go unreported? Even those who have died at home have made headlines in newspapers across the country. There are essentially ZERO deaths that are missed, whilst there are 5-7x infections missed for every 1 that is caught by testing.
Its obvious that deaths cannot be underreported, but I think that you are grossly reporting the numbers of actual infections. Id' guess by a factor of twenty. First, because the numbers of tested individuals is low, since you are only tested if you have symptoms. Since the incubation period averages 5 days, that's 5 days that the infected person is infecting others. Secondly since most cases have mild symptoms they are unlikely to go and get tested. Mortality rate calculations will always be a guess because the numerator (deaths) is known, but the denominator is unknown, and probably 20 times the number of known cases.
One thing to examine is the infection models, which are patently flawed, with ostensible claims of massive "exponential" increases in cases. The logic goes "1 infects 2 (or 3), 2-3 infect 4-9, 4-9 infect 8-27 ... and so on. But in the real world that's not how infections spread because very quickly during this expansion the newly infected will be lapped over by their physical proximity with others in the connectivity pyramid. Those in the pyramid will be infecting the same people, therefore the expansion breaks down naturally. Think The Bacon Number, epidemically speaking. I ALL major epidemics the expansion of new cases increases exponentially early then suddenly reverses. Epidemics burn themselves out.
COVID-19 - Evidence Over Hysteria
https://whotrades.com/people/474441518/timelinehttps://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(19)30328-5/fulltextMedia Hysteria
https://techstartups.com/2020/03/12/coronavirus-panic-media-not-telling-even-3-4-global-death-rate/