• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: 2019-nCoV / Corona virus Pt 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Doghouse Reilly said:
I never said it was right, I was sharing that guy's opinion. I didn't claim the UK would have fewer than 8,000 deaths.
Click to expand...
That's disingenuous. You linked to John Oxford's opinion piece and quoted him saying that he didn't think the COVID-19 total death toll in the UK would exceed 8,000, an opinion that is looking increasing absurd each day.

Without offering an opinion on the article, it's fair to assume that you agreed with it, given that he was offering the same opinion to you, that this COVID-19 is no worse than seasonal flu.

Linking to an article that agrees with your point of view and then shrugging your shoulders and saying "Hey, I never said I agreed with it!", when it's shown to be very wrong, is intellectually dishonest. Don't be that person who trawls Google or social media looking for opinions and articles that support your point of view and just link to anything you find that happens to agree with you, only to disown them when they turn out to be completely wrong.

The death toll in the UK has gone from under 2,000 to over 6,000 in the week since that article was written. He's clearly very, very wrong if he thinks the death toll in the UK won't go up by another 2,000. It will in the next few days, never mind before the pandemic is over.
 
Last edited:
Let’s drop this side line about each other’s predictions and bets. Take it to PM with the member if you want to chat about it. Let’s return this thread to directly discussing the science, current figures etc. topics. Ignoring this mod box will result in suspension without appeal.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat
 
Good news from Germany: The number of people sick from the thing is sinking (at least from Saturday to the end of the data). I found that out because it angered me that certain crappy "news" websites only show the ever-accumulating infections and deaths, but never those recovered. Johns Hopkins Istitute has a (however accurate) number for that so I took their raw data sets and made a fancy plot to show it to some frightened, easily-misled people ("Genesen" = recovered):

NadgvaO.png
 
The Atheist said:
And just to keep everyone on their toes, a predictable side effect of the shutdowns: rats!

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52177587
Click to expand...

We skipped Passover last night, to enforce social distancing. Maybe we could have a special "coronavirus edition", with ten special plagues for the modern era.

We've got the disease itself, rats, locusts (in Africa....shipments of insecticide have been delayed or blocked, leading to locust swarms), daily Trump briefings, I'm sure we could come up with six more plagues.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Good news from Germany: The number of people sick from the thing is sinking (at least from Saturday to the end of the data). I found that out because it angered me that certain crappy "news" websites only show the ever-accumulating infections and deaths, but never those recovered. Johns Hopkins Istitute has a (however accurate) number for that so I took their raw data sets and made a fancy plot to show it to some frightened, easily-misled people ("Genesen" = recovered):

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/NadgvaO.png[/qimg]
Click to expand...


I've noticed a lot of social engineering in what the media are and are not reporting in the U.S.. I suspect it's from the media and various levels of government self-censoring with concerns about what effects their reporting might have, rather than some shadowy authority enforcing it. But either way, I can't really say I'm against it.

Just about when I was starting to track cases in my state county by county, which information is provided consistently day by day by the state, the state governor advised individual towns not to disclose their own data. (Not every town complied.)

Why? Well, I'm in the southern part of my own county, and it turns out that half the cases in the county were happening in one single town in the northern end. It would have been easy to get a false sense of security from that. People might think, my town doesn't even have any cases, why should I stay home?

Now, it appears the number of newly confirmed cases per day might be leveling off. (I'll know more at 10pm UTC.) So the media's emphasis has shifted to the number of deaths, which of course lags well behind the number of newly confirmed cases and will continue increasing dramatically for at least another week. Again, why? Well, the deaths are arguably more newsworthy. But also, people might think a leveling off of new cases justifies getting careless at a still-crucial time. (Those who have been consistently careless from the start won't be affected either way.)

The total number of confirmed cases and the total number of deaths can only ever increase, of course. The media will use that to stretch out the "it's not over, you know" message for as long as necessary.
 
crescent said:
Okay - big ugly spreadsheet post.

History: On March 20, I started a spreadsheet. I took the total number of deaths in America as of that day (from the Worldmeter site), and multiplied times 1.2, compounding each day (a 20% daily increase). I picked 1.2 more or less out of my butt, because just looking at the numbers for the previous week 1.2 seemed to be a bit lower than the actual rate of growth. Also, it made a nice comparison to 1.1, which seemed to be about the daily rate of growth for the worldwide total deaths (but I didn't put that into a spreadsheet because I was really just playing around).

I ran out the spreadsheet for sixty days (the total for May 19 was 14,368,616 deaths). But the rate of spread was actually a fair bit above 20%, so the numbers got off pretty quickly. Here's the numbers from that first set of calculations compared to actual numbers:



date|projected|actual
date|deaths|deaths
20-Mar|255|255
21-Mar|306|301
22-Mar|367|458
23-Mar|441|555
24-Mar|528|780
25-Mar|634|1027
26-Mar|761|1295
27-Mar|913|1695
28-Mar|1096|2220
29-Mar|1315|2583
30-Mar|1578|3141
31-Mar|1894|4053

By March 31, the two columns were pretty far off. In a bad way - actual deaths by then were more than twice as high as projected. The death total was increasing at well above 20% daily.

So I restarted the column on March 31. I posted that to the forum, but I had started it with the total as of mid-day. I should have picked an end-of-day total instead. So that's what I have below (starting with end of day numbers for March 31, so it is a bit off compared to the numbers I posted last week). This is the calculation of a 20% daily increase in total deaths for the U.S., run out for three weeks of projection with the actual included up to yesterday:

Date|20% growth| Actual
date|projection| Numbers 31-Mar | 4053| 4053 1-Apr | 4864| 5102 2-Apr | 5836| 6076 3-Apr | 7003| 7121 4-Apr | 8404| 8451 5-Apr | 10,085| 9616 6-Apr | 12,102
7-Apr | 14,522
8-Apr | 17,427
9-Apr | 20,913
10-Apr | 25,095
11-Apr | 30,114
12-Apr | 36,137
13-Apr | 43,364
14-Apr | 52,037
15-Apr | 62,445
16-Apr | 74,934
17-Apr | 89,920
18-Apr | 107,904
19-Apr | 129,485
20-Apr | 155,382
21-Apr | 186,459

This is actually "better" so far - things are sticking closer to 20% growth. I mean, 20% daily growth in total deaths is horrible - but the numbers since March 31 suggests that the rate of acceleration of total deaths is slowing down. Most days, more people die than did the previous day - but not by as wide of a margin.

(The table does look very good, I could not figure out how to make a decent looking table in the forum post. I would be happy if someone with better forum-format juju could make it look prettier.)(ETA: Nevermind, I made it look better by looking at the formatting in one of Novaphile's posts. Now it looks better)
Click to expand...


Update on the numbers for the newer table:

Date|20% growth| Actual
date|projection| Numbers 31-Mar | 4053| 4053 1-Apr | 4864| 5102 2-Apr | 5836| 6076 3-Apr | 7003| 7121 4-Apr | 8404| 8451 5-Apr | 10,085| 9616 6-Apr | 12,102| 10571 7-Apr | 14,522 | 12841 8-Apr | 17,427
9-Apr | 20,913
10-Apr | 25,095
11-Apr | 30,114
12-Apr | 36,137
13-Apr | 43,364
14-Apr | 52,037
15-Apr | 62,445
16-Apr | 74,934
17-Apr | 89,920
18-Apr | 107,904
19-Apr | 129,485
20-Apr | 155,382
21-Apr | 186,459

Still increasing, but it is not accelerating as fast as it was in late March. Even yesterday's seemingly big jump in U.S. deaths was 'only' an 18% increase, well below the 25% daily increases we were seeing in March, and the actual numbers are getting further and further below what a 20% daily increase would result in, unlike in March when the actual numbers were much higher than what a 20% daily would result in.

That's edging into something like good news, as this makes the less-than-catastrophic outcomes look a bit more likely. Things are getting worse, but not a quickly as before. The U.S. daily increase is still well above the average rate of increase for the rest of world for whatever that's worth.
 
Last edited:
crescent said:
Update on the numbers for the newer table:

Date|20% growth| Actual
date|projection| Numbers 31-Mar | 4053| 4053 1-Apr | 4864| 5102 2-Apr | 5836| 6076 3-Apr | 7003| 7121 4-Apr | 8404| 8451 5-Apr | 10,085| 9616 6-Apr | 12,102| 10571 7-Apr | 14,522 | 12841 8-Apr | 17,427
9-Apr | 20,913
10-Apr | 25,095
11-Apr | 30,114
12-Apr | 36,137
13-Apr | 43,364
14-Apr | 52,037
15-Apr | 62,445
16-Apr | 74,934
17-Apr | 89,920
18-Apr | 107,904
19-Apr | 129,485
20-Apr | 155,382
21-Apr | 186,459

Still increasing, but it is not accelerating as fast as it was in late March. Even yesterday's seemingly big jump in U.S. deaths was 'only' an 18% increase, well below the 25% daily increases we were seeing in March, and the actual numbers are getting further and further below what a 20% daily increase would result in, unlike in March when the actual numbers were much higher than what a 20% daily would result in.

That's edging into something like good news, as this makes the less-than-catastrophic outcomes look a bit more likely. Things are getting worse, but not a quickly as before. The U.S. daily increase is still well above the average rate of increase for the rest of world for whatever that's worth.
Click to expand...

Since 20% is already looking too high, here are the expected numbers at 15% starting from April 5


05-Apr 1.00 09616
06-Apr 1.15 11058
07-Apr 1.15 12717
08-Apr 1.15 14624
09-Apr 1.15 16818
10-Apr 1.15 19341
11-Apr 1.15 22242
12-Apr 1.15 25578
13-Apr 1.15 29415
14-Apr 1.15 33827
15-Apr 1.15 38902
16-Apr 1.15 44737
17-Apr 1.15 51448
18-Apr 1.15 59165
19-Apr 1.15 68039
20-Apr 1.15 78245
21-Apr 1.15 89982

Here is another version where the increase continues to slow. For simplicity sake I just added a couple inflection points, but an actual curve would be better.

05-Apr 1.15 09616
06-Apr 1.15 11058
07-Apr 1.15 12717
08-Apr 1.15 14624
09-Apr 1.1 16818
10-Apr 1.1 18500
11-Apr 1.1 20350
12-Apr 1.1 22385
13-Apr 1.1 24623
14-Apr 1.1 27086
15-Apr 1.05 29794
16-Apr 1.05 31284
17-Apr 1.05 32848
18-Apr 1.05 34491
19-Apr 1.05 36215
20-Apr 1.05 38026
21-Apr 1.05 39928
 
Some good trend changes!

IHME''s updated projections show a substantial drop in deaths from 82k a few days back to 60k with their 95% range for 31k to 127k.

Caveat: These projections are only for the first wave (The Hammer) and assume full social distance control through the end of May. The Dance part from loosening controls selectively will add to these numbers. How much will depend on the tradeoffs made between the economy and health.

Also, they have now extended their model to EU countries which provides nice visibility into what's happening there.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
 
Researchers at Harvard University have proposed that long-term exposure to high levels of particulate pollution is a significant risk factor for fatal cases of covid-19. This seems intuitive, but I'm a little surprised that they were able to get results so quickly if they were normalizing for population density, poverty rates, smoking rates, etc.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/h...tion-linked-with-higher-covid-19-death-rates/
 
Last edited:
TellyKNeasuss said:
Researchers at Harvard University have proposed that long-term exposure to high levels of particulate pollution is a significant risk factor for fatal cases of covid-19. This seems intuitive, but I'm a little surprised that they were able to get results so quickly if they were normalizing for population density, poverty rates, smoking rates, etc.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/h...tion-linked-with-higher-covid-19-death-rates/
Click to expand...


Well, maybe the looked at a map of air pollution (NO2) in Europe in February 2020 and found Lombardy...

R7ZISyt.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom