Cont: 2019-nCoV / Corona virus Pt 3

[Mader Levap]

Looking forward to higher death numbers. Keep it classy.

Do you believe that epidemiologists predicting x deaths in y country look forward to it?

Whether China has learned its lesson regarding covering up infection numbers after today and report any resurgence of infections is yet to be seen.

Unlikely. Messengers are always shot in totalitarian countries. And every government regardless of system will have monstrous incentive to downplay numbers in every way possible. Only question is which countries lie more.

 

[Doghouse Reilly]

Do you think the prediction is wrong or not?

I have no opinion about death rates in the UK. I haven't looked at the situation there very extensively.

 

[Belz...]

Looking forward to higher death numbers. Keep it classy.

Wow, talk about a dishonest response. You had to work quite hard to spin it that way.

 

[crescent]

crescent's and lomiller' tables merged

date|20% daily|15% daily|decreasing|actual
31-Mar| 1.2 4053| | | 4053
1-Apr| 1.2 4863 | | | 5102
2-Apr| 1.2 5836 | | | 6076
3-Apr| 1.2.... 7003 | | |7121
4-Apr| 1.2.... 8404| | |8451
RESET
5-Apr| 1.2.... 9616| 1.15.... 9616| 1.15.... 9616|9616
6-Apr| 1.2.... 11539| 1.15.... 11058| 1.15.... 11058|10871
7-Apr| 1.2.... 13847| 1.15.... 12717| 1.15.... 12717|12841
8-Apr| 1.2.... 16616| 1.15.... 14624| 1.15.... 14624|
9-Apr| 1.2.... 19939| 1.15.... 16818| 1.15.... 16818|
10-Apr| 1.2.... 23927| 1.15.... 19341| 1.1..... 18500|
11-Apr| 1.2.... 28713| 1.15.... 22242| 1.1..... 20350|
12-Apr| 1.2.... 34456| 1.15.... 25578| 1.1..... 22385|
13-Apr| 1.2.... 41347| 1.15.... 29415| 1.1..... 24623|
14-Apr| 1.2.... 49616| 1.15.... 33827| 1.1..... 27086|
15-Apr| 1.2.... 59639| 1.15.... 38902| 1.05.... 29794|
16-Apr| 1.2.... 71447| 1.15.... 44737| 1.05.... 31284|
17-Apr| 1.2.... 85737| 1.15.... 51448| 1.05.... 32848|
18-Apr| 1.2.... 102884| 1.15.... 59165| 1.05.... 34491|
19-Apr| 1.2.... 123462| 1.15.... 68039| 1.05.... 36215|
20-Apr| 1.2.... 148153| 1.15.... 78245| 1.05.... 38026|
21-Apr| 1.2.... 177785| 1.15.... 89982| 1.05.... 39928|

I don't see these as actually having any predictive value, but I find them useful as frames of reference. What happens if we keep up the growth rate we saw earlier? What happens if it drops a bit. Drops a lot?

None of that tells us which table columns are more or less likely, but coupled with news of actions being taken, we get an idea of how different courses of action can lead to very different death tolls, even if the change is not immediately apparent.

 

[Dr.Sid]

Got the map for Wuhan?

windy.com has real time pollution map for the whole world.

 

[crescent]

Snopes has shared some cool visualizations of the changes in death rates over time (original article in The Conversation, but not linked directly by Snopes and I'm too lazy to find it):

Three Graphs That Show a Global Slowdown in COVID-19 Deaths

 

[The Atheist]

Why do you say that? I haven't seen any numbers to that effect.

The growth in Russia is just starting to hit top gear, and Vlad didn't take measures early enough to stop a fairly severe outbreak.

Keep watching.

Good news from Germany

Yep. They're definitely over the hump - mind you, that was obvious when they started taking other patients and lending equipment.

What - if anything - is the government saying about what happens next?

I'd say you're still several weeks away from any kind of return to normality but I haven't seen many governments saying how they're going to come out.

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.

Do they have to be plagues? The western Pacific islands have just been wasted by a Cat 5 cyclone that would have been big news in normal times.

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.

Very good link, thanks.

I like this bit:

“The study results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis.”

That's something that needs to be heavily emphasised once the disease starts to die down. It might well encourage people to tele-commute rather than sit and breathe exhaust fumes.

 

[Belz...]

The growth in Russia is just starting to hit top gear, and Vlad didn't take measures early enough to stop a fairly severe outbreak.

Keep watching.

No, I'm asking you what is you basis for what you said? What numbers do you have, and what is your source?

 

[Doghouse Reilly]

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.

It's not disingenuous at all, as I agree with the general sentiments expressed in the article. That doesn't mean I agree with/endorse every exact figure he put forth. I agree with him on the general basis that the deaths in the UK will be far, far below those predicted by the Imperial College.

I think it IS disingenuous to suppose that just because someone posts an article with opposing views that that means the poster agrees with every last detail therein.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Yep. They're definitely over the hump - mind you, that was obvious when they started taking other patients and lending equipment.

What - if anything - is the government saying about what happens next?

I'd say you're still several weeks away from any kind of return to normality but I haven't seen many governments saying how they're going to come out.

There likely won't be any word from Merkel before early next week when she will meet with the federal governments. These measures are almost completely in the hands of the latter, including education. Since when they were closed in mid-March the plan is to open the schools again on April 20, where in many states the regular Easter school break would have ended as well.

Merkel wants a unified line but it could well be that different federal states choose different approaches to get out of that. Which could be helpful to collect data on how it goes from there.

It's been like that also during the last weeks. I'm in NRW under relatively light quarantine while f.e. the folks in Bavaria or Thuringa are slightly more restricted.

 

[The Atheist]

Sweden's experiment seems to be headed into dangerous territory.

 

[Samson]

That's something that needs to be heavily emphasised once the disease starts to die down. It might well encourage people to tele-commute rather than sit and breathe exhaust fumes.

Already talk of converting commercial to apartments in New Zealand.

Ann Gibson in podcast I can't find from Herald. This occured to me weeks ago.

 

[Lennart Hyland]

Currently my brother wifes grand father is being treated for Covid19, he is in critical condition. He is 80 years old and suffering from a quite bad diabetes.

The sad thing about it is that when it started to spread in Sweden he called his children and begged them not to come and visit in order to not get infected. Then the care service did their regular check up and spread the virus to him.

Now some week later he died, alone with no family next to his side. Like so many other people infected with COVID-19.

It strange because I spend some time staring at these graphs over the spread but this turned into something else.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

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/

The CNN article on this had a little more information. From what I could gather via a hasty reading, the study pertained to particulates under 2.5 micrometers. As I understand it, they looked at the average concentration in counties from 2000 to 2016, and found that above an average concentration of 13 micrograms/cubic meter, every additional 1 microgram/cubic meter was correlated with a 15 percent increase in the per capita fatalities in that county.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/07/health/covid-19-air-pollution-risks-wellness/index.html

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Snopes has shared some cool visualizations of the changes in death rates over time (original article in The Conversation, but not linked directly by Snopes and I'm too lazy to find it):

Three Graphs That Show a Global Slowdown in COVID-19 Deaths

Thanks for sharing. Those graphs are an interesting way to present the data and took me a minute to really grasp. They're also curiously similar to the Tokyo Subway map.

 

[The Atheist]

Already talk of converting commercial to apartments in New Zealand.

Christ, if you can show me a way to short that plan I'd put it in the "Even better than TVIX" category.

It really shouldn't surprise me, but people are just not thinking this through.

The NZ housing crisis is over; dead, buried & cremated, and we didn't even need to kill all the old ladies to do it.

1 AirBNB will bring thousands of properties onto the market. No tourists = no need for AirBNB.
2 Tens of thousands of twenty-somethings will move back in with their parents, because they have no job.
3 Tens of thousands of student visa holders will leave the country as soon as they can, because they absolutely will not find 20 hours work a week in the local cafe any more. They don't qualify for the dole and will have zero income.
4 There will be a massive number of properties looking for a fast or forced sale at cheap prices.

Current apartments will be a financial millstone and thinking you'll do conversion of commercial because the commercial property market is down 60% is stupid as hell.

My guess is, banks will see through it and not lend, so there won't be any. Bank economists are usually pretty pragmatic types and while money's cheap, it still needs to be paid back.

 

[The Atheist]

Now some week later he died, alone with no family next to his side. Like so many other people infected with COVID-19.

It strange because I spend some time staring at these graphs over the spread but this turned into something else.

I said well back that every person on the planet will be touched by this disease.

Sorry for your loss. Making it personal is what viruses do.

 

[marting]

crescent's and lomiller' tables merged
I don't see these as actually having any predictive value, but I find them useful as frames of reference. What happens if we keep up the growth rate we saw earlier? What happens if it drops a bit. Drops a lot?

None of that tells us which table columns are more or less likely, but coupled with news of actions being taken, we get an idea of how different courses of action can lead to very different death tolls, even if the change is not immediately apparent.

IK grabbed USA historical data from the Johns Hopkins GitHub depo and applied my 7 day straddle to it producing this:

Date|Deaths/day|Ratio|R
20-Mar|49|
21-Mar|60||1.28|4.4
22-Mar|109|1.33|5.63
23-Mar|125|1.25|3.84
24-Mar|154|1.32|5.36
25-Mar|236|1.29|4.63
26-Mar|267|1.19|2.9
27-Mar|372|1.19|2.83
28-Mar|445|1.31|4.95
29-Mar|441|1.2|3.06
30-Mar|511|1.24|3.57
31-Mar|895|1.17|2.53
1-Apr|884|1.16|2.42
2-Apr|1169|1.12|1.98
3-Apr|1161|1.09|1.69
4-Apr|1320|1.13|2.12

This shows a trend toward lower daily increases and associated R's.


https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
I also took data from IHME's (above) model for future projections for the latter part of April. Given that deaths tend to have a sharper up ramp than down ramp after infection and different regions will have different curves, these numbers look pretty reasonable.

Date|Deaths|Deaths/day|Ratio|R
7-Apr|12704|||
8-Apr|14607|1903||
9-Apr|16644|2037|1.07|1.5
10-Apr|18748|2104|1.03|1.21
11-Apr|20899|2151|1.02|1.14
12-Apr|23112|2213|1.03|1.19
13-Apr|25248|2136|0.97|0.81
14-Apr|27404|2156|1.01|1.06
15-Apr|29506|2102|0.97|0.86
16-Apr|31589|2083|0.99|0.95
17-Apr|33591|2002|0.96|0.79
18-Apr|35553|1962|0.98|0.89
19-Apr|37411|1858|0.95|0.72
20-Apr|39200|1789|0.96|0.8
21-Apr|40899|1699|0.95|0.73
22-Apr|42514|1615|0.95|0.74
23-Apr|44027|1513|0.94|0.68
24-Apr|45445|1418|0.94|0.68
25-Apr|46774|1329|0.94|0.68
26-Apr|47997|1223|0.92|0.61
27-Apr|49107|1110|0.91|0.56

Deaths continue to decline to approx. 60k with 95% range of 31k to 127k. This seems about right given that most parts of the USA implemented significant social distancing/shutdowns on March 17-22 and there is about a 3 week delay between infection and those that die.

 

[JesseCuster]

It's not disingenuous at all, as I agree with the general sentiments expressed in the article. That doesn't mean I agree with/endorse every exact figure he put forth. I agree with him on the general basis that the deaths in the UK will be far, far below those predicted by the Imperial College.

I think it IS disingenuous to suppose that just because someone posts an article with opposing views that that means the poster agrees with every last detail therein.

The only part of the article I took issue with was the exact part of the article you quoted. The death toll in the UK is currently over 7,000 and in 1 or 2 days will overtake the 8,000 figure he says he feels it won't pass. He's simply way, way off here. This article is just one of many opinions I've come across online determined to equate the COVID-19 pandemic to something like seasonal flu. Even if it's nowhere near as bad as the worst case scenarios being thrown around, he (and others) are grossly downplaying the seriousness of it.

I never had a go at you for agreeing with anything else in the article, never mind "every last detail". I simply corrected the part of the article you went to the trouble of quoting.

 

[Andy_Ross]

938 confirmed deaths in UK today