The graves will likely be on Hunt Island. Gravedigging detail could be a reprieve from COVID-19 for those lucky enough to get the job.
It's hard to argue this without looking at the model and it's assumptions. ie: did it account for collapsing systems and the associated deaths? that would actually be a given under the premise presented (countries doing nothing).
Again, I'm not going to defend a model I know nothing about, especially one that was superseded with augmented information. However, I don't have any evidence he penned that using anything but standard modeling, or was purposely misleading.
This would be great news, if they can be mass produced and distributed before September. Are they anti-body tests?
potholer54 dropping truth nukes per par. yeah... this channel is my limited version of TGY youtube vomits
The revised CFR of .66 was working off the Wuhan data (and the Diamond Princess data), and Wuhan did see their healthcare infrastructure overwhelmed. The main variable that has driven down the CFR is the gross underestimation of asymptomatic and mild cases. Is it a factor of 5, 10, 20, 100? We don't know, but the Lancet study tries to ballpark it. When things settle down and those antibody tests come online, we'll just have to randomly mass test millions and then revise the numerator/demoninator accordingly. Hopefully the Summer settles things down, we'll get better data, and then can better plan for what will no doubt be a second wave starting in the Fall.
How's come when I cited the .66 I was called everything but a white man & tossed down once & again with the sodomites? "Hi, guys, short time, no see, let me bend over. Okay, I'm ready."
Yet, when somebody else cites it they're feted like the 2nd coming.
It's BS!
France sees biggest fatality day with 500
US overtakes china in deaths
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ovid-19-model/
See? Easy. But then you start trying to fill in the blanks. That’s when you discover that there isn’t a single number to plug into … anything. Every variable is dependent on a number of choices and knowledge gaps.
The problem is, calculating the virus’ fatality rate is fuzzy from the very start. It can vary wildly from cohort to cohort. “Because age is a huge factor, you have to adjust case fatality rates for the demographic makeup of the U.S., and also the rate of comorbidities,” said Rae Wannier, a biostatistician at the University of California, San Francisco, in an email to FiveThirtyEight. (Comorbidities are other underlying diseases and conditions that can exacerbate the effects of COVID-19.)In other words, there is no single “fatality rate” — there are many. The fatality rate for the United States is going to differ from the fatality rate in a country where, say, diabetes is less prevalent. The same could be said for the rates within the U.S. — if the virus spreads in a metro area with many elderly residents, the fatality rate calculated there will be higher than if the epicenter was in a city that skewed younger.
But let’s stay international for now. Does knowing the fatality rate of COVID-19 in China or Italy tell us what the fatality rate will be in the U.S.? It certainly helps — but that just lowers the uncertainty, it doesn’t make things certain.
Of course, we probably don’t know the actual fatality rate in those places, anyway. That’s true for a number of reasons, starting with the collection of basic data about coronavirus cases. Numbers aren’t facts. They’re the result of a lot of subjective choices that have to be do ented transparently and in detail before you can even begin to consider treating the output as fact. How data is gathered — and whether it is gathered the same way each time — matters.Think of it like making a pie. If you have a normal recipe, you can do it pretty easily and expect a predictable result that makes sense. But if the recipe contains instructions like “add three to 15 chopped apples, or steaks, or brussels sprouts, depending on what you have on hand” … well, that’s going to affect how tasty this pie is, isn’t it? You can make assumptions about the correct ingredients and their quan y. But those are assumptions — not absolute facts. And if you make too many assumptions in your pie-baking process, you might very well end up with something entirely different than what you were meant to be making. And you wouldn’t necessarily know you got it wrong.Over the next few months, you are going to see many different predictions about COVID-19 outcomes. They won’t all agree. But just because they’re based on assumptions doesn’t mean they’re worthless.
“All models are wrong, it’s striving to make them less wrong and useful in the moment,” Weir said.
Last edited by MannyIsGod; 03-31-2020 at 02:09 PM.
Noting shows ignorance more than cherry picking certain studies because they conform to your world view rather than taking a holistic approach with all available data/research. IMO.
FIFY tbh
That's what I did from the beginning, but I was told only the initial Imperial study and its projections "counted."
Oh,
While everyone was screaming ITALY!!!, I was saying, "Well, their population is older, they die at a 10x higher rate than the US from the flu, Lombardy region is terribly polluted, and Italy's data also found that the survival rate for older people without pre-existing conditions is 99.2 percent."“Because age is a huge factor, you have to adjust case fatality rates for the demographic makeup of the U.S., and also the rate of comorbidities,” said Rae Wannier, a biostatistician at the University of California, San Francisco, in an email to FiveThirtyEight. (Comorbidities are other underlying diseases and conditions that can exacerbate the effects of COVID-19.)
Optimist! You're not an epidemiologist! THE IMPERIAL STUDY! Exponential growth!
According to a new analysis by the Department of Health and Human Services, 50 to 129 million (19 to 50 percent of) non-elderly Americans have some type of pre-existing health condition.Oh,
While everyone was screaming ITALY!!!, I was saying, "Well, their population is older, they die at a 10x higher rate than the US from the flu, Lombardy region is terribly polluted, and Italy's data also found that the survival rate for older people without pre-existing conditions is 99.2 percent."
Senior citizens, who are mostly covered under Medicare, are much more likely to report personally having a pre-existing condition, with 38% saying they do.
In addition to older Americans, those who say they are overweight are especially likely to report having a pre-existing condition -- 34% do, compared with 22% who describe themselves as being normal weight or underweight.
I think your math is faulty.
Funny, no one seems to take issue with influenza death rate method.
Oh good. It'd been at least 24 hours since someone whatabouted the flu
It says 2m antibody testing kit.
An Illinois infant diagnosed with COVID-19 may be the first US baby killed by the pandemic, though the cause of death is unknown, according to a local report
NY Post
Casual dismissal of the fact doesn't negate it.
"The Bodysphere two-minute test can only detect the coronavirus in people who have had the infection for several days, meaning the test can't be used too early on when the body hasn't produced enough antibodies."
Yes, and this is concerning, especially re: the South's obesity rate. But in terms of respiratory illness susceptibility, Italy seems to be one of the most fragile regions in the world (Europeans are typically chronic smokers, as well).
2009/2010 USA H1N1 swine FLU: 60M infected, 12500 dead, was less transmissible, was less mortal than covid-19
And credit MannyIsGod for the 538 article. I'd like to highlight a few passages:
For a goddamn week I've been talking about how these studies could shed better light on what the ratio of mild/asymptomatic to severe cases might be. I was basically shouted down and told to "trust the experts!" experts in this case being the Imperial Study and similar studies that share those projections.The results of this unusual setup suggest that there are a lot of people walking around with COVID-19 who don’t know it — and, consequently, that the death rates are lower than other data has suggested. In the Diamond Princess population, the fatality rate for people with a diagnosis and symptoms was 2.3 percent, but the fatality rate for all diagnosed cases — including those who were asymptomatic — was 1.2 percent.1 In Iceland, a company called deCODE Genetics started offering free screenings to the general, asymptomatic population on March 13. As of March 29, deCODE identified 71 infected people in a sample of 8,694 tests, including asymptomatic infections.
Been saying this for a week, that you can't neatly compare regions 1 to 1, and that population density, weather, social behavior, and primary method of travel (mass transit vs. cars) play a big role in spread. I was told to shut up and prepare for every part of the country to become Italy or a mini-Italy.Here’s the thing: Transmission is likely to be extremely variable, dependent on all kinds of social behaviors, local environmental details and political decisions. It’s not going to be the same from one country to another. It’s probably not going to be the same from one state to another. It’s going to change over time depending on what actions we take to combat the virus. Malaria, for example, has a higher basic reproduction number in places where there’s a lot of standing water.
.“All models are wrong, it’s striving to make them less wrong and useful in the moment,” Weir said.
Yep. And compared with other models and opinions, the Imperial model is more wrong from my point-of-view. But I (nor anyone else) is not allowed to have that point-of-view because I'm "not an expert," even though I'm invoking expert opinion.
Are you really still wondering why the governments of the world are shutting over COVID and not the seasonal flu?
It's pretty funny how such a super sleuth like you would prefer to use his skills to dig up info on spurstalk posters instead of easy to find answers to his real world questions
There are currently 44 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 44 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
