Inverted_Trough Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 Roughly 600 people per day on average have died in NYC from March 11th through today. That's about a 400% increase from the typical ~150 daily average. Apparenty now we are being told that the "fear of COVID" is causing more deaths than COVID itself. This conversation has really jumped the shark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowfan Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 SIAP This seems not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 Today was initially looking more hopeful with NY and NJ coming in lower but we’re back up around 1800 deaths anyway, also closing in on the daily 30,000 cases. Not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGolfBro Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 4 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said: So let’s make the assumption that those who are poor, elderly, and have preexisting conditions are the least able to absorb the downstream economic consequences of this and remain healthy. That’s a similar demographic dying disproportionately from covid. Why do you care less about the Covid victims and more about these downstream victims? I think it’s a matter of doing the cost benefit analysis (which is not a fun analysis to do when dealing with life and death) to determine which scenario causes more hardship and death. If i have a model that shows An additional 100k deaths from Covid if we don’t have a full shutdown for 3 more months and there is no other considerations i think most people would be on board. But if we then contrast that to a model that shows 60 million lost jobs and several hundred thousand Premature deaths due to the economic and societal disruption of the shutdown, then what do you do? And the other murky thing is these are just models. They may or may not be close to reality. We had a model that showed 2.2 million deaths in America a month ago that was considered serious at the time. Economic models can have flaws too. Another consideration is the death and hardship from the shutdowns will not just come for the sick and elderly. A ton of factors to consider. It’s a complex problem and we need to try to find the optimal solution. And it’s likely the optimal solution will still include a lot of death sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAPE Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 59 minutes ago, Baltimorewx said: The definition of obese is a bit crazy though. I’m 5’8, 205....I wouldn’t consider myself all that fat, but under the definition, I’m obese Clearly you drink too much beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 18 minutes ago, Inverted_Trough said: Some serious doom porn fans in the weather community. Crazy that humans created both of these disasters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 4 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said: Today was initially looking more hopeful with NY and NJ coming in lower but we’re back up around 1800 deaths anyway, also closing in on the daily 30,000 cases. Not good. Wow 30k people caught COVID-19 today. Imagine that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, PhineasC said: Wow 30k people caught COVID-19 today. Imagine that. Eventually to get fully back to normal that numbers going to have to go WAY down. I know you’re in denial about that still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnowGolfBro Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 I have a forum wide poll question. If we tested every American today for Covid 19 (or if they have the antibody) how many people do you suppose would test positive? I will start. I think the number would be at least 10 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 13 minutes ago, Inverted_Trough said: Roughly 600 people per day on average have died in NYC from March 11th through today. That's about a 400% increase from the typical ~150 daily average. Apparenty now we are being told that the "fear of COVID" is causing more deaths than COVID itself. This conversation has really jumped the shark. What if we took the flu season and just compressed it into a couple of months? That change your analysis at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 1 minute ago, SnowGolfBro said: I have a forum wide poll question. If we tested every American today for Covid 19 (or if they have the antibody) how many people do you suppose would test positive? I will start. I think the number would be at least 10 million. That seems like a reasonable guess to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inverted_Trough Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, SnowGolfBro said: I think it’s a matter of doing the cost benefit analysis (which is not a fun analysis to do when dealing with life and death) to determine which scenario causes more hardship and death. If i have a model that shows An additional 100k deaths from Covid if we don’t have a full shutdown for 3 more months and there is no other considerations i think most people would be on board. But if we then contrast that to a model that shows 60 million lost jobs and several hundred thousand Premature deaths due to the economic and societal disruption of the shutdown, then what do you do? And the other murky thing is these are just models. They may or may not be close to reality. We had a model that showed 2.2 million deaths in America a month ago that was considered serious at the time. Economic models can have flaws too. Another consideration is the death and hardship from the shutdowns will not just come for the sick and elderly. A ton of factors to consider. It’s a complex problem and we need to try to find the optimal solution. And it’s likely the optimal solution will still include a lot of death sadly. It's a political calculation too. An overwhelming majority of people supported restricting the economy to save lives (even if those lives are largely very old people). Having a virus wipe out 30% of your elderly population isn't a good look for politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 46 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said: So let’s make the assumption that those who are poor, elderly, and have preexisting conditions are the least able to absorb the downstream economic consequences of this and remain healthy. That’s a similar demographic dying disproportionately from covid. Why do you care less about the Covid victims and more about these downstream victims? I think there will be way more of them, and more than half of COVID deaths (far more in some places) are very old, very sick people who would likely die within six months. The economic impact deaths will be much stronger amongst young people here, and especially in the developing world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 10 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said: Eventually to get fully back to normal that numbers going to have to go WAY down. I know you’re in denial about that still. I am still not sure if you realize these numbers are completely at the mercy of test volume. Way more than that have COVID-19 right now. Way more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaydreb Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 24 minutes ago, snowfan said: SIAP This seems not good. We desperately need rapid result testing. No one should be setting foot in a nursing home unless they are tested first. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inverted_Trough Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 11 minutes ago, PhineasC said: What if we took the flu season and just compressed it into a couple of months? That change your analysis at all? Not at all. That's what a novel virus does. Except that the death counts will be also much higher because nobody has immunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 Ugh this is ridiculous fear-mongering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 6 minutes ago, PhineasC said: I am still not sure if you realize these numbers are completely at the mercy of test volume. Way more than that have COVID-19 right now. Way more. So if you go to a country where covid isn’t prevalent and run a couple hundred thousand tests you’ll find the same number of + cases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 1 minute ago, Inverted_Trough said: Not at all. That's what a novel virus does. Except that the death counts will be also much higher because nobody has immunity. So has it occurred to you that the "daily excess deaths" figures you just noted may not mean much as a snapshot today? Smooth them over the year like we do with flu deaths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inverted_Trough Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 14 minutes ago, SnowGolfBro said: I have a forum wide poll question. If we tested every American today for Covid 19 (or if they have the antibody) how many people do you suppose would test positive? I will start. I think the number would be at least 10 million. It's probably about 3% of the population. Could be up to 15% in certain places like NYC. Some people on this forum actually thought 30% of the population is already infected, which it complete bunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 Just now, PhineasC said: So has it occurred to you that the "daily excess deaths" figures you just noted may not mean much as a snapshot today? Smooth them over the year like we do with flu deaths. lol what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 3 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said: So if you go to a country where covid isn’t prevalent and run a couple hundred thousand tests you’ll find the same number of + cases? Depends on the country, but in places in Africa and Latin America you'd find a ton of cases, yes. Climate may be holding the virus back a bit there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inverted_Trough Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 Just now, PhineasC said: So has it occurred to you that the "daily excess deaths" figures you just noted may not mean much as a snapshot today? Smooth them over the year like we do with flu deaths. It's not clear what your point is. The annualized death count will be much higher than the flu because the entire population is vulnerable. It doesn't matter if you smooth it over a year. There's a flu vaccine, and we also have some partial immunity to the flu, so the vulnerable population is much smaller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 19, 2020 Share Posted April 19, 2020 3 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said: lol what? Sorry if you don't understand. If we go up the curve in 30 days and back down in 30 days, how can you compare day to day numbers to a disease that kills at a fairly even rate for 6-7 months of the year (in some places)? You need to look at the impact across the year to make it apples to apples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 19, 2020 Share Posted April 19, 2020 Just now, Inverted_Trough said: It's not clear what your point is. The annualized death count will be much higher than the flu because the entire population is vulnerable. It doesn't matter if you smooth it over a year. There's a flu vaccine, and we also have some partial immunity to the flu, so the vulnerable population is much smaller. It may not end up much worse globally than a really bad flu year with social distancing measures in place. Depends on what happens in the fall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhineasC Posted April 19, 2020 Share Posted April 19, 2020 7 minutes ago, Inverted_Trough said: It's probably about 3% of the population. Could be up to 15% in certain places like NYC. Some people on this forum actually thought 30% of the population is already infected, which it complete bunk. Where are you getting those numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted April 19, 2020 Share Posted April 19, 2020 2 minutes ago, PhineasC said: Sorry if you don't understand. If we go up the curve in 30 days and back down in 30 days, how can you compare day to day numbers to a disease that kills at a fairly even rate for 6-7 months of the year (in some places)? You need to look at the impact across the year to make it apples to apples. I really don’t know what your point is sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeguyfromTakomaPark Posted April 19, 2020 Share Posted April 19, 2020 6 minutes ago, PhineasC said: Depends on the country, but in places in Africa and Latin America you'd find a ton of cases, yes. Climate may be holding the virus back a bit there. Our testing volume has plateaued recently. If we keep finding the same number of cases on approx the same number of tests that shows the prevalence might not be dropping very much. The current volume of cases is causing thousands of deaths a day. I’m not sure what’s complicated about that for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inverted_Trough Posted April 19, 2020 Share Posted April 19, 2020 Just now, PhineasC said: Where are you getting those numbers? I based the 3% on the various small studies I've seen thus far (including the Santa Clara one from yesterday) I base the 15% on some crude mathematics: There are 135,000 confirmed cases in NYC. The general rule of thumb in epidemiology is to assume that there are 5 to 10 times as many people in the population that have been infected but are unconfirmed. So if we assume a worst case of 10x, we would have 1.3 million New Yorkers that have/are infected. 1.3 million / 8.6 million (total population) = 15% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40westwx Posted April 19, 2020 Share Posted April 19, 2020 40 minutes ago, PhineasC said: Wow 30k people caught COVID-19 today. Imagine that. Probably whole sh$t ton more than that given the Santa Clara numbers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts