Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

Class of '66 Old Fart

Coronavirus and Its Impact

By Class of '66 Old Fart, in Off Topic Forum

Recommended Posts

Golfman25    5,017

Golfman25
Posted

Seems the expert agrees with me about the scary predictions based on faulty models. 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/03/26/dr_birx_coronavirus_data_doesnt_match_the_doomsday_media_predictions_or_analysis.html

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/489774-birx-cautions-against-inaccurate-models-predicting-signficant-coronavirus

 

rcbowla reacted to this

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Old Friend    8,389

Old Friend
Posted
3 hours ago, Golfman25 said:

Seems the expert agrees with me about the scary predictions based on faulty models. 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/03/26/dr_birx_coronavirus_data_doesnt_match_the_doomsday_media_predictions_or_analysis.html

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/489774-birx-cautions-against-inaccurate-models-predicting-signficant-coronavirus

 

Pretty easy situation to diagnose, if you ask me.  This thing lives for ~ 14 days in-vitro and less than 3 on any surface.   We've shut a whole lot of things down, and started "social distancing" probably 8-10 days ago on a serious level.

Seems to me the "new" cases will drop dramatically because of those measures, and the cases currently presenting are generally at least a few days old.   To achieve those shocking numbers, new cases would have to crop up en masse, and with social distancing, shelter in place orders, and no social gatherings available; there's no way for this virus to expand with the kind of numbers it would take.  I don't know if that makes sense to anyone but me... however I hate the new terms.  "Social distancing"  "Shelter in place."    Those are now a permanent piece of our vernacular.   Sigh.

HoosierFan1994 and Hardwood83 reacted to this

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lebowski    2,442

Lebowski
Posted
5 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

Pretty easy situation to diagnose, if you ask me.  This thing lives for ~ 14 days in-vitro and less than 3 on any surface.   We've shut a whole lot of things down, and started "social distancing" probably 8-10 days ago on a serious level.

Seems to me the "new" cases will drop dramatically because of those measures, and the cases currently presenting are generally at least a few days old.   To achieve those shocking numbers, new cases would have to crop up en masse, and with social distancing, shelter in place orders, and no social gatherings available; there's no way for this virus to expand with the kind of numbers it would take.  I don't know if that makes sense to anyone but me... however I hate the new terms.  "Social distancing"  "Shelter in place."    Those are now a permanent piece of our vernacular.   Sigh.

That's a perfect world of applying the exponential equation however there are plenty of states that have not taken the proper measures for the math to work they way you are thinking.  Unfortunately, the United States isn't on the same page from state to state.  Mid April should show us where we are as a country regarding the spread.  China was/is able to apply that math you speak of because well, it's China.  They have the authority to apply draconian measures.  

What we do know right now is that the global spread is on a massive trajectory at an alarming pace.  Yesterday we hit the 5th 100k confirmed cases in a matter of 2 days.  As I type this right now we're likely to hit the 6th 100k in 1 day.  Currently sitting at 565k confirmed cases.  

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Old Friend    8,389

Old Friend
Posted
50 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

That's a perfect world of applying the exponential equation however there are plenty of states that have not taken the proper measures for the math to work they way you are thinking.  Unfortunately, the United States isn't on the same page from state to state.  Mid April should show us where we are as a country regarding the spread.  China was/is able to apply that math you speak of because well, it's China.  They have the authority to apply draconian measures.  

What we do know right now is that the global spread is on a massive trajectory at an alarming pace.  Yesterday we hit the 5th 100k confirmed cases in a matter of 2 days.  As I type this right now we're likely to hit the 6th 100k in 1 day.  Currently sitting at 565k confirmed cases.  

Lot of that exponential growth is because of testing.  More tests = more positives.  That doesn't reflect growth; it reflects normal testing results.   And while a small number of people (and per capita, it is a very small number) continue to engage in "gathering," the number is exponentially smaller than it otherwise would have been.  That's why projections dropped so dramatically.  The US and Italy, for example, are vastly different places.  The hot spots here are - like Italy - in places where people are on top of each other.  Lots of spread from Mardi Gras, for example.  Lots in NYC. Lots among homeless in CA.  Not so much in the midwest or in the so called fly over states.  Growth there is not exponential,and right now, I think the number is 1 in 2.5 new cases are either in New York or New Orleans.

Agree 100% on mid April.  I thought Easter was a good date to re-evaluate, not necessarily open things up again.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lebowski    2,442

Lebowski
Posted
2 hours ago, Old Friend said:

Lot of that exponential growth is because of testing.  More tests = more positives.  That doesn't reflect growth; it reflects normal testing results.   And while a small number of people (and per capita, it is a very small number) continue to engage in "gathering," the number is exponentially smaller than it otherwise would have been.  That's why projections dropped so dramatically.  The US and Italy, for example, are vastly different places.  The hot spots here are - like Italy - in places where people are on top of each other.  Lots of spread from Mardi Gras, for example.  Lots in NYC. Lots among homeless in CA.  Not so much in the midwest or in the so called fly over states.  Growth there is not exponential,and right now, I think the number is 1 in 2.5 new cases are either in New York or New Orleans.

Agree 100% on mid April.  I thought Easter was a good date to re-evaluate, not necessarily open things up again.

While that is true, the virus itself is an 'exponential virus'.  So that means if I'm in a town of 3600 or a city of 3.6 million the exponential growth of the spread is the same percentage regardless.  The percentages drastically change depending on types of lock down in your state or town etc. etc. 

Here's an effective visual to demonstrate. 

Covid-19-Transmission-graphic-01.gif?fbc


Here's a read from a Software CEO out of Oregon that so far has been spot on with the numbers by applying math.  I encourage everyone to read it.  

https://medium.com/@Jason_Scott_Warner/why-there-are-more-people-with-covid-in-your-town-than-you-think-3fa81406bb75

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Golfman25    5,017

Golfman25
Posted
42 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

While that is true, the virus itself is an 'exponential virus'.  So that means if I'm in a town of 3600 or a city of 3.6 million the exponential growth of the spread is the same percentage regardless.  The percentages drastically change depending on types of lock down in your state or town etc. etc. 

Here's a read from a Software CEO out of Oregon that so far has been spot on with the numbers by applying math.  I encourage everyone to read it.  

https://medium.com/@Jason_Scott_Warner/why-there-are-more-people-with-covid-in-your-town-than-you-think-3fa81406bb75

Unfortunately his analysis doesn't account for many factors.  First, the more cases which are confirmed, the ultimate percentages of hospitalizations and deaths decline, so it is in error to apply today's "know" percentages to an assumed number.  You won't know until you know.  Regardless of how many are infected, the fact is that the vast majority of cases are resolved and don't result in hospitalization or death.   Also, his exponential "math" doesn't account for a declining rate.  Our rate of spread has declined from mid 40% to holding at 25% the past 4 days.  Italy is current holding at 8%.  As our mitigation efforts take effect, expect that rate to decline further.  That's the key number to watch.  

I am NOT saying don't take it seriously.   Take precautions -- stay home, wash hands, etc.  However, I am saying be skeptical of claims of nationwide doom.  

IUsafety, Hardwood83 and rcbowla reacted to this

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lebowski    2,442

Lebowski
Posted
33 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

Unfortunately his analysis doesn't account for many factors.  First, the more cases which are confirmed, the ultimate percentages of hospitalizations and deaths decline, so it is in error to apply today's "know" percentages to an assumed number.  You won't know until you know.  Regardless of how many are infected, the fact is that the vast majority of cases are resolved and don't result in hospitalization or death.   Also, his exponential "math" doesn't account for a declining rate.  Our rate of spread has declined from mid 40% to holding at 25% the past 4 days.  Italy is current holding at 8%.  As our mitigation efforts take effect, expect that rate to decline further.  That's the key number to watch.  

I am NOT saying don't take it seriously.   Take precautions -- stay home, wash hands, etc.  However, I am saying be skeptical of claims of nationwide doom.  

His primary analysis isn't focusing on confirmed cases.  That's a faux number.  He calls it 'close to meaningless' due to lack of testing.  He's focusing on the future forecast (hospitalizations) based on the lack of testing being applied right now.  Declining rate of today's confirmed cases shouldn't be the focus and an absolutely worthless number right now for this type of math. (Especially in state's that have been relaxed with lockdowns.)  It will potentially later down the road however.  Focusing on confirmed cases is the actual problem.  That's what he's trying to say here.  He mentioned the count of deaths will be 'more directionally accurate and telling' as this thing keeps going.  And I believe that.

He's also very generous with what number to use on how to apply the exponential math.  And most importantly he's fully admitted all of his calculations are assumed. However, by applying the exponential math to this virus he's able to conceptually infer his assumptions.  His initial thought of applying 10x to confirmed cases was actually too low based on the current growth.  That much is true.   

In my opinion right now this very second the key number to watch is the amount of testing that is taking place.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardwood83    4,747

Hardwood83
Posted
1 hour ago, Lebowski said:

While that is true, the virus itself is an 'exponential virus'.  So that means if I'm in a town of 3600 or a city of 3.6 million the exponential growth of the spread is the same percentage regardless.  The percentages drastically change depending on types of lock down in your state or town etc. etc. 

Here's a read from a Software CEO out of Oregon that so far has been spot on with the numbers by applying math.  I encourage everyone to read it.  

https://medium.com/@Jason_Scott_Warner/why-there-are-more-people-with-covid-in-your-town-than-you-think-3fa81406bb75

Interesting article. I think he means well, but does come across as a little breathless and sensational, for example: "Why this virus is a SuperVirus and unlike other viruses"  That makes it hard to take him too seriously. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lebowski    2,442

Lebowski
Posted
32 minutes ago, Hardwood83 said:

Interesting article. I think he means well, but does come across as a little breathless and sensational, for example: "Why this virus is a SuperVirus and unlike other viruses"  That makes it hard to take him too seriously. 

Maybe.  But he also wrote this in the same blog:  "All my concerns in the first post turned out to be true. All of the math I laid out was true."

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go To Topic Listing Off Topic Forum


×