Jump to content

The Coronavirus thread


Recommended Posts

A study was published today looking at the effect that lockdown and other measures had on reducing the spread of COVID-19. For the countries studied, they estimate that the measures prevented 62 million confirmed cases (and 530 million total infections). They estimate that the US avoided 4.8 million confirmed cases (corresponding to 60 million total infections). Abstract from the study is copied below. And here is a CNBC article providing a summary.

Quote

Governments around the world are responding to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic with unprecedented policies designed to slow the growth rate of infections. Many actions, such as closing schools and restricting populations to their homes, impose large and visible costs on society, but their benefits cannot be directly observed and are currently understood only through process-based simulations . Here, we compile new data on 1,717 local, regional, and national non-pharmaceutical interventions deployed in the ongoing pandemic across localities in China, South Korea, Italy, Iran, France, and the United States (US). We then apply reduced-form econometric methods, commonly used to measure the effect of policies on economic growth, to empirically evaluate the effect that these anti-contagion policies have had on the growth rate of infections. In the absence of policy actions, we estimate that early infections of COVID-19 exhibit exponential growth rates of roughly 38% per day. We find that anti-contagion policies have significantly and substantially slowed this growth. Some policies have different impacts on different populations, but we obtain consistent evidence that the policy packages now deployed are achieving large, beneficial, and measurable health outcomes. We estimate that across these six countries, interventions prevented or delayed on the order of 62 million confirmed cases, corresponding to averting roughly 530 million total infections. These findings may help inform whether or when these policies should be deployed, intensified, or lifted, and they can support decision-making in the other 180+ countries where COVID-19 has been reported.

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


And Trump still refuses to wear a mask.  I was half listening/watching TV this morning and Trump was visiting a manufacturer that makes the swabs for testing I believe.  As I said I wasn't paying a whole lot of attention to it, but every person there had a mask on except Trump.  They said after he left they had to throw out anything being made at that time because of his refusal to wear a mask.  What a stupid selfish man.  He could of worn one those above. Probably would have made the company pay for it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the whole point: until there's a vaccine, the virus will continue to spread.  We can only take steps to mitigate its spread – social  distancing, masks, working from home, etc. – but humans don't like to be shut off from other humans and we don't like being restricted in any way.  Throw on top of that a collapsing economy and government leaders felt the pressure to "reopen" even while the virus spread was peaking in many places.   

It'll be an interesting next several months.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't the CDC predicting a lot more death than we are seeing now? I think I recall them saying we would have 3000 deaths a day by now.

George Floyd had coronavirus, do we count his death in the statistics? I don't think we should.

If this is true https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/08/health/coronavirus-asymptomatic-spread-who-bn/index.html does that change anything for the approach?

We need to at least think about the possibility that this was a giant panic, that our experts led us astray and destroyed trillions in economic output and ruined lives for nothing. It's an interesting thought!

Wouldn't be the first time that the smart people that can take abstractions and models and actually truly believe them to map to reality, did so. 

Edited by joenc
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joenc said:

We need to at least think about the possibility that this was a giant panic, that our experts led us astray and destroyed trillions in economic output and ruined lives for nothing. It's an interesting thought!

I agree, we should use evidence to consider the possibility that we overreacted. The death toll from COVID may have indeed been ‘nothing’. I am eager to hear your evidenced-based analysis.

(the chart below is from more than a month ago,  current US deaths will eclipse US deaths in WWI within the next week.)

nothing
 

image.thumb.png.4ec03c0ccc4f80785672847838e9e155.png

Edited by kermit
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if we do basic things like not send people with covid-19 to long-term care facilities (nursing homes) we'll be fine.

Someone who was probably smart and educated at one of our fine universities probably made the original decision: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-york-will-no-longer-require-nursing-homes-take-covid-n1204586

Your average person, armed only with common sense, lacking models, would not have done something like that.

2 hours ago, kermit said:

I agree, we should use evidence to consider the possibility that we overreacted. The death toll from COVID may have indeed been ‘nothing’

(the chart below is dated, current US deaths will eclipse US deaths in WWI within the next week)

nothing
 

image.thumb.png.4ec03c0ccc4f80785672847838e9e155.png

How do you choose who to include in that figure?

Edited by joenc
remove unnecessary comment
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's possible to tell one way or the other.

I was in favor of a lockdown before there was a lockdown, and then had my mind changed 3 weeks ago or so once the forecasts were shown to be false and I read the source code that powers one of the prominent models. T

Add to it the public health people being in favor of protests, which I support during normal times, and you have an  emperor wears no clothes scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, joenc said:

I don't think it's possible to tell one way or the other.

Sure it is. Its called an excess deaths measure (essentially mortality increase compared to pre-virus).

CDC puts the number between 98,000 and 132,000.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

I would argue that the excess deaths measure is actually an underestimate of COVID deaths since people have been less exposed to accidents during lockdown.

2693FAF2-0B6B-451C-B8B0-284057FA9B08.png

Edited by kermit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, kermit said:

Sure there is. Its called an excess deaths measure (essentially mortality increase compared to pre-virus).

CDC puts the number between 98,000 and 132,000.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

 

2693FAF2-0B6B-451C-B8B0-284057FA9B08.png

"While reported counts are weighted to account for potential underreporting in the most recent weeks, the true magnitude of underreporting is unknown. Therefore, weighted counts of deaths may over- or underestimate the true number of deaths in a given jurisdiction."

They share the weighted vs unweighted numbers in the technical report, without nice graphs. Attached is an example for a week for the entire US.

Screen Shot 2020-06-09 at 10.46.43 AM.png

 

How do they determine the weighted numbers, do they use their models and forecasts?

Do they go back and update the observed number once they all come in?

Edited by joenc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a hoaxer. Covid-19 exists, is deadly, and certain things done by the experts have made it worse (ventilators, putting sick people back in nursing homes, being against travel bans).

People still should be cautious, wear masks, wash their hands, social distance, stay home if sick at all. These activities are minimal inconvenience and worth doing.

Edited by joenc
remove statement about incompetent public leaders.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Close everything back down again. :lol: Way to go Texas: https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2020/06/10/texas-shatters-record-for-new-coronavirus-cases/#1793aa649230

Texas reported over 2,500 new coronavirus cases Wednesday—the highest reported in a single day by far since the pandemic started—as the number of Texans currently admitted to hospitals for coronavirus climbed to a new record for the third straight day, as the state, which had one of the fastest and most aggressive reopening timelines in the nation, has seen a surge in infections about two weeks after Memorial Day.

Edited by gman430
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.