341–350 of 406 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tests are still scarce.
Maybe or may not be true. I just got an email from local urgent care that they have the fast test equipment that can offer a result within 15 minutes if you are negative. The situation is changing quickly
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That makes you think it should be a bell curve? Are you arguing it will be a bell curve with such a peak, even if restrictions are weakened or removed? That is unlikely.
I am not. I am arguing that the current trajectory data we're observing [2] does not align with the projections of our current trajectory provided by the government of California (the light blue line labeled 'With Intervention' [1]) [1] https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/California... . [2] https://covid-19.direct/state/CA
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should infections follow a bell curve? Shouldn't it be the derivative of a the logistic curve, which should be approximately exponential on both ends. I don't see how a quadratic should show up in the exponent; either mathematically or epidemiologically.
That's a good question. If control measures are undertaken to "flatten the curve" down to the capacity of the medical system, we'd expect to see new infections per day and deaths per day level out, maybe decline a little, but not decline a lot. Which is what the actuals show for the areas worst off.[1] At some point, there's saturation, and "herd immunity". For this virus, that's somewhere in the 60%-80% range of the…
It's 2 million worldwide. The US is now above 600,000:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The county health officials would presumably coordinate with each other, as San Francisco and San Mateo are already doing.
But to your point, San Mateo is not closing off 280 and 101 to stop S.F. traffic. And the Governor has issued a stay-at-home policy to the San Francisco Bay Area, not just one or two cities. So that's why I think area-wide policies work better than county-by-county policies. We could have San Diego area ban and policy, L.A./OC/San Bernardino, Santa Barbara/Ventura/San Louis Obispo... you get the picture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a good question. If control measures are undertaken to "flatten the curve" down to the capacity of the medical system, we'd expect to see new infections per day and deaths per day level out, maybe decline a little, but not decline a lot. Which is what the actuals show for the areas worst off.[1] At some point, there's saturation, and "herd immunity". For this virus, that's somewhere in the 60%-80% range of the…
It seems like both the perception of and response to this pandemic are not reflective of reality. What am I getting wrong here? - Around 200 million Americans will eventually get it, barring extraordinary events (like a vaccine arriving in 6 months). We cannot change this. - Around 0.5% will die, overwhelmingly those who had a low remaining life expectancy to begin with. This is a much larger body count than most peo…
This doesn't seem right to me. With social distancing now, and testing and tracing once we have enough tests available, it seems to me that we should be able to keep the total number of infected people well below 200M, even if a vaccine takes the expected 18-24 months. If there's a solid argument that this is not the case, I'd like to hear it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a good question. If control measures are undertaken to "flatten the curve" down to the capacity of the medical system, we'd expect to see new infections per day and deaths per day level out, maybe decline a little, but not decline a lot. Which is what the actuals show for the areas worst off.[1] At some point, there's saturation, and "herd immunity". For this virus, that's somewhere in the 60%-80% range of the…
The "curve" in "flatten the curve" is an epidemic curve, not a Bell curve. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemic_curve
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Additionally, notice that the orange data points (actual hospitalizations) are significantly under the "With Intervention" plot. So why even include the slide? Clearly the assumptions behind the "With Intervention" plot do not match reality TODAY, let alone in a few weeks. Not a good sign if people are making actual decisions based on this.
Whenever I see the IHME charts[1] (which are great) I think “I wish I could see the what the model predicted before today’s date so I can assess it.” This shows laudable transparency, in my view. (Also the model was directionally correct, it’s not like it was entirely the wrong shape.) [1] https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/cali...
Do you have a background in disease modeling or anything?
I'm curious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not 0.5% it’s closer to 2%. You don’t have a normal economy if people don’t want to go out in public or the supply chain is interrupted as workers get sick. A pandemic will harm the economy no matter what we do, these efforts, it is hoped, will reduce the impact while also saving lives and the hospital system.
No, 2% is the case fatality rate. The true overall mortality is far lower. Germany did a randomized test recently of a town and calculated that 2% of the population is actively infected, 14% possess antibodies indicative of a current/prior infection, and overall 15% have been infected at some point. Once this broader testing was completed, the overal mortality was found to only be 0.37%. For comparison, a typical flu…
That is incorrect. The worst flu wave to hit Germany in the last 20 years, 2017/2018, killed appoximately 25000 people (excess mortality). That's 0.03%, and it's not typical. Often, the number is much lower.
Note also that the results from the Gangelt study you're referring to are preliminary; there's a press release but no paper yet, not even in preprint.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tests are still scarce.
Maybe or may not be true. I just got an email from local urgent care that they have the fast test equipment that can offer a result within 15 minutes if you are negative. The situation is changing quickly
That's a big chunk on top of current testing, but probably not enough to make it easy to move forward with a testing based strategy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"some of them have been highly successful in containing the disease without any lock down (Korea, Taiwan, and Australia) come to mind." How are you defining lock down here? I live in Australia and most people I know have been working from home for weeks and have had kids out of school during that time. All restaurants have been closed for a while now. There are stops/checks at border entry points between states, even…
I wish this was the situation here. The limitations in most of Europe and united states are much much harsher, including no schools and mandatory closure of all non-essential business.