Coronavirus Thread

  • Thread starter Deleted member 2897
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,760
I posted about the earlier. See:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/without-a-vaccine-herd-immunity-wont-save-us/

Do the math. If we don't have a vaccine and we need ~ 70% infection to reach herd immunity and the IFR is .5 (it was .878 in NYC, btw), the equation tells us:

(330M * .7) * .005 = 1,155,000 deaths

I might also point out that we are at the very start of this and the 85,408 deaths we have so far took place over the last 11 weeks. Got anything similar to support your numbers?

I thought not.

The numbers are solid. It's solid math and solid statistical analysis. The variable missing, though, is the prospect that as time goes on more treatments will emerge to ameliorate the effects of the virus. Which to my mind is a good reason to keep it shut down for a while to see if such treatments can be found and manufactured in sufficient amounts.

https://www.jpost.com/health-scienc...st-coronavirus-french-researchers-find-626999

https://www.ibtimes.com/coronavirus...revent-covid-19-deaths-study-analyzes-2971915
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,760
I would tend to agree with that too. But how do you reconcile that with demands we MUST get more testing. If testing is that unreliable... then just take precautions, respond to symptoms, and be safe.

If it's the best we have at this point, I wouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. We still need testing. I read about a girl who had symptoms and tested negative. She was told no to worry about it but her mother insisted on another test and she came up positive. She got treatment, probably in the nick of time, and barely survived. Sometimes they have to test more than once. IIWII.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
So this isn't accurate? April 6th?
https://www.wistv.com/2020/04/07/go...-at-home-order-fight-coronavirus-outbreak-sc/

I can't find any mention of a voluntary order except for a bunch or editorials disagreeing with the Gov. for not issuing an order.

Yes, that article is not accurate. The press would argue with him every day about it and he would laugh at them for splitting hairs. And you'll note on April 6th it wasn't a stay at home order either. Work was also included, as well as being able to go to the grocery store, Lowes, Home Depot, Walmart, and so on. The only thing that materially changed on that day was that they increased fines behind it for non-compliance. And I guess that was enough to appease the press. By the way, that same order in terms of having fines behind it was removed 2 weeks ago. Yet we still show up on the map in many news reports as having a stay at home order. Go figure. March 15th was when the governor first put into place stay at home restrictions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Deleted member 2897

Guest
I would tend to agree with that too. But how do you reconcile that with demands we MUST get more testing. If testing is that unreliable... then just take precautions, respond to symptoms, and be safe.

My wife is a nurse and she vehemently disagrees and laughed at the TV this morning when they brought that up. There are any number of other health issues and viruses that could lead to the symptoms he had.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
I posted about the earlier. See:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/without-a-vaccine-herd-immunity-wont-save-us/

Do the math. If we don't have a vaccine and we need ~ 70% infection to reach herd immunity and the IFR is .5 (it was .878 in NYC, btw), the equation tells us:

(330M * .7) * .005 = 1,155,000 deaths

I might also point out that we are at the very start of this and the 85,408 deaths we have so far took place over the last 11 weeks. Got anything similar to support your numbers?

I thought not.

The problem with this analysis is the IFR. If we have not learned anything (which is actually a defensible position sadly), then this makes sense. But honest to pete, if we haven't after all this time, we have no excuse. We know who like 99% of the at risk people are here. If we can't shape public policy around certain actions that protect them, then we deserve what we get. But I don't think that's where we are, which is why these analyses like this one are fatally flawed. In most states half of the deaths are in nursing homes. Most of the rest are elderly. None of those people should be participating in any sort of push for herd immunity or return to economic activity.

B8Puiio.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,150
Its really exhausting trying to keep counteracting misinformation. I mean, you didn't specifically say only a couple governors were putting in place a high-volume testing and contact tracing plan, but you said "prove me wrong". Okay, South Carolina:
https://www.postandcourier.com/heal...cle_1fec00fe-8f1a-11ea-96f0-8be4198900e2.html
As a part of that, they're also putting in exactly the science-based strategy we should - obsessively protect nursing homes and the vulnerable, while enabling everyone else safely possible to keep the state economy. Someone has to pay for all this you know.

We could go on all day.

You continue to state that people cannot safely participate in the economy while at the same time protecting the vulnerable. That's a false choice. People having been doing it the entire time. But here's again (for like the eleventeenth time) the good news for you - if you don't trust us and other people, you can continue to stay isolated for as long as you see fit. My in-laws are doing exactly that. They are extremely vulnerable. It doesn't matter if everybody in the grocery store (one of the very few places they visit) is naked sneezing on each other and licking the floor, they're not going to get the virus. They go rarely and stock up. They go at off hours. They wear gloves and masks. They disinfect everything once they get home and let it sit long enough for any virus still escaping their precautions to die on the surface. And on and on. You can live and act in a way that ensures you don't get the virus. Its not magic.

A little bit of a thank you from some of you guys would be better here - many of us are trying to keep the economy going to pay people's bills and pay the taxes that will fund your ability to stay home.
Well, first, my ability to stay home has more to do with 50 years of hard work and saving before retirement then with you going back to work or, I might add, social security, but we'll let that pass. You whippersnappers have no real conception of what us geezers went through to get a decent living as we got older. No reason to expect much respect from you either.

Glad to see that South Carolina is moving at last. It would have been a lot more sensible - and this was what I was talking about - if they had started during the shutdown. Now, they could have the no doubt enriching experience of trying to ramp up a contact/isolate regime during a re-ignition of the virus.

I have never stated that "… people cannot safely participate in the economy while at the same time protecting the vulnerable"; indeed, I have said pretty much exactly the opposite several times here. If we had a viable contact/isolate regime in place and had run the virus down to levels where doing that wouldn't be impossible (you can't effectively track infections until the virus is beat down), then a return to normal activity would be reasonable and safe for everybody, despite a lower level of infection. Your problem is that you want to re-open the economy when the preconditions for normal activity have not been met. That won't work and my guess is that you know it. And that will lead to a massive number of needless excess deaths going forward. You may be willing to pay that price or maybe you just don't care; I'm not and I do. All I'm asking is that we have a regime in place that will allow us to return to normal without that threat. Until we get a vaccine, people will die from SARS-Cov-2; it's going to be bad pretty much no matter what we do. There's no need at all to make things worse then necessary.

And on vulnerability: you seem to be fixated on the elderly. My son's best friend is in his mid-thirties as is his wife. He's an attorney working in Columbus, They just had their first child. He is seriously asthmatic and she has a serious medical condition that she keeps private. Both of them are part of the 44M Americans who may be forced back to work, despite being as vulnerable as I am ("You can come back. Young people don't die from COVID-19!"). Think about them more, why don't you?
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,595
I posted about the earlier. See:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/without-a-vaccine-herd-immunity-wont-save-us/

Do the math. If we don't have a vaccine and we need ~ 70% infection to reach herd immunity and the IFR is .5 (it was .878 in NYC, btw), the equation tells us:

(330M * .7) * .005 = 1,155,000 deaths

I might also point out that we are at the very start of this and the 85,408 deaths we have so far took place over the last 11 weeks. Got anything similar to support your numbers?

I thought not.
So, you are saying we might have as many as 1 million die before we get to herd immunity? Is that your point?

How many would have died anyway in the time period for us to get to herd immunity? Given the stats, you need to adjust and deduct this....and given that this virus attacks primarily those over 80 years of age, your numbers should be reduced dramatically. Let's see, given that there are (very roughly) 10 million Americans aged 80 and over, and an annual mortality rate in that age group of (again roughly) 10%, under normal circumstances, we'll lose about 1 million elderly every year anyway. How long would it take to reach the figures you are referring to? Do you genuinely believe that the right way to look at this is to ignore those who would pass away anyway and focus on those who died as if they were the same as a child at age 5 who dies from the flu? I used age 80 because that is the average age of covid deaths...if we extend this thinking to those aged over 70, the numbers become MUCH bigger....and the variance between expected deaths and actual deaths becomes much narrower.

That is what I keep saying when I harp on the media using headlines to scare people.....there is more to the story when you reflect on it and think it through. I urge you to do the same.

Look, I am not advocating doing nothing. I am advocating for the approach wherein those young and less at risk shelter, and the rest of the population goes on about their business responsibly. I will still wear a mask to the grocery store (or to a football game come this Fall if allowed). But the shutdown approach that is often advocated is too extreme.

I am arguing against government seizing power in the name of fear and panic instead of reason and, you know, REAL SCIENCE.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Well, first, my ability to stay home has more to do with 50 years of hard work and saving before retirement then with you going back to work or, I might add, social security, but we'll let that pass. You whippersnappers have no real conception of what us geezers went through to get a decent living as we got older. No reason to expect much respect from you either.

Glad to see that South Carolina is moving at last. It would have been a lot more sensible - and this was what I was talking about - if they had started during the shutdown. Now, they could have the no doubt enriching experience of trying to ramp up a contact/isolate regime during a re-ignition of the virus.

I have never stated that "… people cannot safely participate in the economy while at the same time protecting the vulnerable"; indeed, I have said pretty much exactly the opposite several times here. If we had a viable contact/isolate regime in place and had run the virus down to levels where doing that wouldn't be impossible (you can't effectively track infections until the virus is beat down), then a return to normal activity would be reasonable and safe for everybody, despite a lower level of infection. Your problem is that you want to re-open the economy when the preconditions for normal activity have not been met. That won't work and my guess is that you know it. And that will lead to a massive number of needless excess deaths going forward. You may be willing to pay that price or maybe you just don't care; I'm not and I do. All I'm asking is that we have a regime in place that will allow us to return to normal without that threat. Until we get a vaccine, people will die from SARS-Cov-2; it's going to be bad pretty much no matter what we do. There's no need at all to make things worse then necessary.

And on vulnerability: you seem to be fixated on the elderly. My son's best friend is in his mid-thirties as is his wife. He's an attorney working in Columbus, They just had their first child. He is seriously asthmatic and she has a serious medical condition that she keeps private. Both of them are part of the 44M Americans who may be forced back to work, despite being as vulnerable as I am ("You can come back. Young people don't die from COVID-19!"). Think about them more, why don't you?

LOL. I'm an old geezer with enough resources to retire right now if I need to. Sad. And that's just 1 piece of like 8 pieces of misinformation you posted in one single response.

Then you continue on with more misinformation: "Your problem is that you want to re-open the economy when the preconditions for normal activity have not been met."

That's patently false. We're at 15% of our COVID-19 ICU hospital bed capacity. Our all time total infection rate in our population is 0.0017. I could go on and on. We are WAY under what conditions are in place to be able to begin carefully slowly and safely opening parts of the economy back up.

"And on vulnerability: you seem to be fixated on the elderly. " Another false statement. We've talked at tremendous length about who is vulnerable to this disease. It is a fact it is by far the elderly, but that's not the entire list.

Then you have some commentary around my behavior as if I don't care and am flippant about it. I've told you the degrees my in-laws are going through and we're supporting them on that. I wear a mask every time I am out to run errands. I use Q-tips to push the credit card buttons and the gas pump. I have hand sanitizer in my car and immediately sanitize my hands and even my wallet when I get back in the car. I haven't let my kids have play dates in months. I could go on and on.

Your entire disposition and the way you talk through these things just seems so silly to me. Its exhausting having to correct misinformation constantly. I just don't understand why you reply to people, argue with things they've said that they never actually said, and then put an exclamation point at the end and cross your arms to announce you're smarter and won the argument again. You're arguing with imaginary people who aren't saying what you accuse them of. What point does that really accomplish?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,760
If we had a viable contact/isolate regime in place and had run the virus down to levels where doing that wouldn't be impossible (you can't effectively track infections until the virus is beat down), then a return to normal activity would be reasonable and safe for everybody, despite a lower level of infection. Your problem is that you want to re-open the economy when the preconditions for normal activity have not been met.

That's the whole ball of wax right there. We simply aren't ready, because we haven't moved with sufficient dispatch to get ready. If we're real lucky the warm weather will beat the thing down and buy us some time - but at this point that's only a hope.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,150
Let's see, given that there are (very roughly) 10 million Americans aged 80 and over, and an annual mortality rate in that age group of (again roughly) 10%, under normal circumstances, we'll lose about 1 million elderly every year anyway. How long would it take to reach the figures you are referring to? Do you genuinely believe that the right way to look at this is to ignore those who would pass away anyway and focus on those who died as if they were the same as a child at age 5 who dies from the flu? I used age 80 because that is the average age of covid deaths...if we extend this thinking to those aged over 70, the numbers become MUCH bigger....and the variance between expected deaths and actual deaths becomes much narrower.
The equation is for excess deaths from SARS-Cov-2 alone.

What you say is true, of course; old people die in large numbers. But it isn't for you or me to decide to take actions that cut their lives short and not care one whit about it. What you are saying - and pretty cavalierly, I might add - is that all those old people aren't worth worrying about when they die of causes that the rest of us could greatly ameliorate if we just get off our collective duffs and take the necessary steps. Somehow I doubt this is a selling message to most Americans.

And it also assumes that all the vulnerable population is old. Look at my post to bewlbo above.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,150
LOL. I'm an old geezer with enough resources to retire right now if I need to. Sad. And that's just 1 piece of like 8 pieces of misinformation you posted in one single response.

Then you continue on with more misinformation: "Your problem is that you want to re-open the economy when the preconditions for normal activity have not been met."

That's patently false. We're at 15% of our COVID-19 ICU hospital bed capacity. Our all time total infection rate in our population is 0.0017. I could go on and on. We are WAY under what conditions are in place to be able to begin carefully slowly and safely opening parts of the economy back up.

"And on vulnerability: you seem to be fixated on the elderly. " Another false statement. We've talked at tremendous length about who is vulnerable to this disease. It is a fact it is by far the elderly, but that's not the entire list.

Then you have some commentary around my behavior as if I don't care and am flippant about it. I've told you the degrees my in-laws are going through and we're supporting them on that. I wear a mask every time I am out to run errands. I use Q-tips to push the credit card buttons and the gas pump. I have hand sanitizer in my car and immediately sanitize my hands and even my wallet when I get back in the car. I haven't let my kids have play dates in months. I could go on and on.

Your entire disposition and the way you talk through these things just seems so silly to me. Its exhausting having to correct misinformation constantly. I just don't understand why you reply to people, argue with things they've said that they never actually said, and then put an exclamation point at the end and cross your arms to announce you're smarter and won the argument again. You're arguing with imaginary people who aren't saying what you accuse them of. What point does that really accomplish?
One thing might help. I've noticed that you tend to think of explanations anecdotally; I tend to think of them generally. When you come here to talk about "misinformation" you usually talk about South Carolina (and I admit I was wrong about that; I looked and I'll be more careful). Most of what I post here is data that is national or comparative between states. If we can agree that focusing on general trends will get us further along, then we'd probably disagree less.

I'm also glad to see that you are behaving rationally about spreading the disease. I do the same things you do. The hint about Q-tips is, btw, very inventive. They go into the glove compartment today.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,760
So Wisconsin courts reject the stay-at-home rules from the Governor. Their opinion states the government has the power to do these things, but they need to follow the law. That’s how courts are supposed to act - not with emotion, but just follow and enforce the law. The governor appears to be pitching a fit. Why don’t you just get with the legislature and do it the right way? What’s so difficult about that? He must feel his crown is being challenged.

It's my understanding that the court ruling said the governor had the right to implement emergency measures, but that they couldn't be invoked indefinitely and unilaterally. At some point the legislature had to be consulted. Seems a reasonable ruling to me.
 

gthxxxx

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
150
Let's simplify things based on what we currently know. Ignoring every other consideration in life, let's say I want to solely minimize risk of getting Covid. It seems I should isolate myself until a) I get vaccinated or b) the virus goes away. Am I missing any other choices? What's the time frame for those options?

Now say I do get Covid. Assuming I survive, I will have developed immunity to that strain and can move pass that point. So what would increase my odds of surviving? Without researching/sourcing anything, I hypothesize good nutrition, exercise, rest, mentality, and genetics would help. Anything I state so far wrong or missing? Can't do much about my genes, but my lifestyle scores pretty well in the rest of the categories... excuse me, my previous lifestyle before isolation/shutdowns.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,760
The problem with this analysis is the IFR. If we have not learned anything (which is actually a defensible position sadly), then this makes sense. But honest to pete, if we haven't after all this time, we have no excuse. We know who like 99% of the at risk people are here. If we can't shape public policy around certain actions that protect them, then we deserve what we get. But I don't think that's where we are, which is why these analyses like this one are fatally flawed. In most states half of the deaths are in nursing homes. Most of the rest are elderly. None of those people should be participating in any sort of push for herd immunity or return to economic activity.

B8Puiio.png
It's fantasy to imagine that it's going to be so prevalent in the population and stay out of the nursing homes. The nurses and other employees go back into the community at large, and then bring it into the nursing home. Obviously, that's about the only way it gets in there, since very few of the patients are going anywhere. The important thing is to shut down to get the virus more under control and buy time for treatments to be developed and manufactured. Then we can open up "safely".
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
One thing might help. I've noticed that you tend to think of explanations anecdotally; I tend to think of them generally. When you come here to talk about "misinformation" you usually talk about South Carolina (and I admit I was wrong about that; I looked and I'll be more careful). Most of what I post here is data that is national or comparative between states. If we can agree that focusing on general trends will get us further along, then we'd probably disagree less.

I'm also glad to see that you are behaving rationally about spreading the disease. I do the same things you do. The hint about Q-tips is, btw, very inventive. They go into the glove compartment today.

I wish I invented the Q-Tip idea, but I didn't. I seldom have any good ideas.

The reason I brought up states in particular, is because its at the state and local level that we will begin opening back up. For example, Chicago is in bad COVID-19 shape, but only in 1 pretty well confined area. Outside of that its not bad...and further out in the rest of the state its a lot of farmland and small towns. You just can't have a federal policy that applies to all states the same. And you can't even have one single state policy that applies to all areas of the state. I just looked at our state health agency website again - my county's all time total infection rate is 0.0009. Our all time death rate is 0.00001 (9 people have died out of 500,000 residents). All elderly. I looked up the zip codes in my particular town, and our total infection rate is also 0.001.

On a side note, when everyone was staying at home much more, it also reduced the spread of other diseases from STDs to the Flu and so on. There were also less gun deaths and injuries, car wrecks, and so on. So one of the overlooked aspects of this turning of the faucet back on is that hospital utilizations will probably increase pretty significantly even if there is zero increase in COVID-19 transmission.
 

bobongo

Helluva Engineer
Messages
7,760
Let's simplify things based on what we currently know. Ignoring every other consideration in life, let's say I want to solely minimize risk of getting Covid. It seems I should isolate myself until a) I get vaccinated or b) the virus goes away. Am I missing any other choices?

The one that might be missing is, c) more treatments are found and developed. They wouldn't prevent you from getting COVID, but they might keep you out of the hospital and above ground.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
It's fantasy to imagine that it's going to be so prevalent in the population and stay out of the nursing homes. The nurses and other employees go back into the community at large, and then bring it into the nursing home. Obviously, that's about the only way it gets in there, since very few of the patients are going anywhere. The important thing is to shut down to get the virus more under control and buy time for treatments to be developed and manufactured. Then we can open up "safely".

With respect, that's still too fatalistic of a view in my opinion. If we had that view, then we should shut down hospitals (bear with me on that bit of hyperbole), because nurses and doctors can't do their job without contracting the disease. We know they do get infected, but across the country its pretty remarkable how they can treat COVID-19 patients with so few of them actually contracting it. The same thing can apply to nursing homes, they are no different. The vast majority of workers in nursing homes right now do not wear full PPE. They just don't. If you go look in COVID-19 ICUs, you won't see nurses and doctors only wearing facemasks. They wear full face shields, gowns, gloves, and so on. They're not doing that in the vast majority of nursing homes, and that's the problem. And it doesn't have to be that way.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,902
Been so busy last week+ haven't been around much (helping daughter and son-in-law in trying to purchase a house).
I can't recommend Nate Silver's Twitter feed enough. He does a great job of providing COVID related statistical data and calling out both the left-wing and right-wing spin.

The last week it has been great to see some legitimate good news on the data front. For the first time since this started we have good downward movement in the national numbers. The National positive case rate is around 7%, that is a level at which we should be able to start opening back up in a gradual and thoughtful manner. Deaths are now 30% below the peak (though still 200% higher than they were at the end of March).
The issue we have right now is we have a Federal Government that has refused to set legitimate triggers and trip wires (unlike say Germany) so everything is too haphazard. You need to have triggers so when things are going well you can move to the next phase of opening. You also need trip wires so if something starts to flash red you can pause and potentially go to a more restrictive layer if necessary (this is what happened in Germany over the weekend in 3 of its states). if you have triggers and trip wires then the data drives the speed of opening.

GA is going in the right direction as well, though not doing as well as the country as a whole. The positive case % is around 13% which is down almost 50% from its peak, but still above the 10% the WHO recommends before loosening any restrictions (and almost double the national average). Death totals have come down slightly from the peak (about 25%) but are still relatively flat and not showing the type of downward trend we are seeing nationally with a rate almost 300% higher than it was at the end of March.

So far people are being relatively careful, which is really helping. using debit and credit card data restaurant purchases have risen between 5-10% since GA has re-opened. My gut on this (and this is my hypothesis, not anything proven) is that those who were doing pick-up and take-out are the ones most likely starting to eat more in the restarants that are allowing that, while some who were not making any purchases from restuarants are at least doing take-out now. As long as cases don't start spiking again their should be a slow and steady climb in economic activity, obviously if there is a spike it will go down again. Overall spending is also up a little over 5%. The public did not completely stop spending in late March (though savings have climbed and credit card debt declined significantly - over 30%), people changed their spending patterns. Alot more online spending and a change in what types of purchases were made.

Keep in mind we are likely going to have a little bit of an economic surprise in October. A couple of the industries that got money from the government had conditions that they could not fire any employees until October 1st. Once that date hits I expect a significant layoff event as companies need to downsize. Airlines don't expect booking levels to reach 2019 levels until 2023. Service industries, especially ones related to travel - airlines, cruises, hotels, restaurants are likely going to be in a severe slump for years. Most countries are implementing quarantine procedures from international arrivals which will likely dampen any international travel (this is particularly important to Europe).

What Disney is doing in Shanghai is likely to be repeated in lots of places. They reopened Shanghai Disney last week. They were allowed to open at 30% capacity (capacity is 80K), they reportedly had more cast members there (12K) than customers. They have already said whenever they get back to opening their US and European Parks that wearing masks will be a requirement, and taking temperatures might be as well. I think it is still unlikely that we see large scale events (conferences, festivals, concerts, sporting events) for the most part until 2021. Doesn't mean their won't be sports, but either they will be without crowds or with limited crowds. Any larger event, mask wearing is likely to be a requirement to attend.

One item that hasn't been discussed much is that every decade industries rise and fall. Some companies go out of business, new ones are created. There is always change and displacement going on. You can never go back to what was, you have to looks forward to what is coming. Usually there is enough time taking place that you can minimize the displacement. But what has happened recently is basically a decades worth of change occuring in about 6-8 weeks. This is going to create a huge displacement issue. I'd guess 5-6M jobs that have been lost so far are likely permanent losses. normally that would be spread out over 10 yrs, instead it is concentrated in 2 months.

I also want to address popular left wing and right wing talking points that are inaccurate. First, there has been too much reporting of cases increasing as reason that things are going badly. If more people are being tested, then you should see more cases, it simply means you are catching more of them that you were missing. Focus on positive case % not total number of cases. On the right-wing you have the false stories about the numbers being inflated. As Nate Silver mentioned in one of his tweets, there aren't any data scientists that believe the numbers are overreported. They are underreported and most data scientists currently estimate the underreporting at 50-60%.

We also are finally starting to see much better modeling as we go along. UMAss Amherst, which creates an ensemble model for the flu every year, has now been able to create an ensemble model for COVID (one of the models inputted is from GT). That is helpful and is what modelers due in forecasting weather events like Hurricanes. The most recent weekly model for that came out yesterday and the ensemble estimate for deaths as of June 6 (some of the models only go out 4 weeks) is currently estimated at 112K with a range of 104K to 123K. What is interesting is as more data has become available some of the more pessimistic models have become more optimistic and some of the more optimistic models have become more pessimistic and are starting to converge more. For those models that go out to the end of July we have a low end of 147K deaths and a high end of 188K deaths as a mean number. Some of the models forecast a relatively continued slow downward trend, some others project a spike up again in July (not as large as the one in April, but still a spike).

I was forwarded a copy of a study that is in peer review yesterday from my wife. In it, they show that if you can get mask usage above 80%, then the transmission rate of the virus drops to just 1/12 of its previous rate. But you have to get to 80%. Almost anything less nets you almost nothing. This lines up with another analysis that I saw that if you are wearing a mask but someone who is infected does not the transmission rate is still almost 70%.

We need to understand that the health crisis and the economic crisis are intertwined. You cannot solve one without solving the other. If you focus on just one then both will fail.
If you truly want to get the economy moving as quickly as possible, then there are 2 things you can do as an American citizen to help. One of those is wear a mask. The second is use social distancing, if you do those 2 things then the virus will subside faster and we can open up more pieces of the economy faster. It turns out the Asian countries understood that with their previous encounters with infectious diseases. When they have an outbreak they are just conditioned to start wearing a mask and keeping more distance from each other, but it allows them to continue on more normally with fewer restrictions. Also, if you do those 2 things it also minimizes the amount of testing needed to keep outbreaks under control.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
The issue we have right now is we have a Federal Government that has refused to set legitimate triggers and trip wires.

Lots of good stuff in your post. This that I've snipped out here is really the only thing I could nit pick. Its impossible for our federal government to set legitimate triggers and trip wires on the re-opening. You really can't even do that at the state level. You have states with massive population centers (like Chicago) that at the same time have huge massive open sparse farming communities. I think you can advise the state and local governments on how to do these things, but its at the local levels that these things need to be done, measured, and managed.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,902
I wanted to talk separately about Sweden. Especially since i'm 25% Swedish.
There is alot of misinformation over what they have and haven't done and their results.

The most important thing to understand is they had orders, but not all of them were mandatory orders.
First off, they did not just 'keep their economy open'. Everyone who was able to work from home is expected to work from home.
They did not keep all schools open. They kept elementary schools open. Secondary schools and universities were closed.
They employed a number of social distancing measures. Most importantly, while they could still go to restaurants and shops, they were asked to keep at least an arms length distance from any other person and there were limitations to the size of parties in restaurants.

if you look at their mobility reports, their mobility decreased almost as much as the US. Just a little bit less. My guess is that if the US didn't have more mandatory orders (that were still well below what most Western European nations imposed), our mobility reports would not have dropped as much as Sweden's did. They have a more communal society than the US which is much more individualistic in nature.

Now the bargain with their population was if they did that they could keep more things open and they would keep their elders safe. Unfortunately it did not work out exactly that way. They are having huge issues with deaths in nursing homes. Currently their per capita death rate from COVID is 6th in the world (almost 40% higher than the US and rising) and if current projections from models are correct will have the 2nd highest per capita death toll by August. Their economy has not crashed as hard as the US's. But they have had significant increases in unemployment and decreases in GDP and are expected to have much worse numbers in the 2nd quarter. The did have to close down a number of large manufacturing centers - like the Volvo plant in Gothenburg. The EC report that came out last week with the economic outlook for all European countries had Sweden's unemployment being higher and GDP being lower in 2021 than some of its European compatriots. It's definitely a mixed bag and due to the cultural differences could have very likely led to a worse economic and health event in the US than we are going through. Swedish citizens have an inherent trust in their governmental leaders and subject matter experts that currently the US does not really possess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top