Page 311 of 1526
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:20 pm
by Sensible Stephen
Duff Paddy wrote:Clogs wrote:Raggs wrote:Clogs wrote:There is no doubt those numbers that have died will continue to increase. It might even reach 30 000. BUt there is real doubt now whether this virus is killing at 4% of those infected. That 4% is what has triggered this mass panic.
No. Most predictions have it around 1% or under. What's caused this panic, is the fact that so many require hospital treatment. Which overwhelms the hospitals, leaving many dying without hospital care (and not just covid victims).
Erm no. Most revised predictions are now modelling closer to 1%. The initial reported figure (and remains current) from the WHO was 4%. This was what the panic started on. Extrapolating that 4% onto a nations population resulted in millions dying. Calmer heads are now analysing the information and some commonsense is entering into the discourse.
It looks like it’s only 1% if measures are taken, if no measures are taken it seems to be higher as the health service becomes overwhelmed. We have a perfect example of that in Italy that simply cannot be ignored.
Exactly. It looks like, if you manage it such that hospitals are not over whelmed, you can keep the death rate under 1%. If you can't, it goes up, way up.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:21 pm
by message #2527204
Clogs wrote:message #2527204 wrote:
It's around a little less than 1% isn't it? But if it gets out of control and swamps the health system like in wuhan, then it was something like 3.4%
Again, Wuhan's figures were death rate/confirmed cases = 3.4%. This is a grossly flawed equation. Confirmed cases (those that were tested) was an order of magnitude lower than those that were/are actually infected. To get the true death rate you need to have the true infected rate. Something that is impossible to do, but epidemiologists are nowstarting to model. And gradually they are starting to agree that this % death rate could be far far far below what is currently reported.
They welded people into their apartments for three weeks to stop it. FFS.
Italy, Spain, France, UK...all the same pattern. All in lock down and still hoping R will drop below 1 sometime soon.
They need to convince people it's fine to go back to work?
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:24 pm
by Premier Red
camroc1 wrote:The problem is the number of ICU beds and those rapidly becoming unavailable. That means patients dying on non ICU wards, or out of hospital.
And it's not as if the US has the best public health system to cope, therein lies the problem, like everywhere else it's how the system can deal with such a significant surge.....thousands die daily in the US, of course they do but from drug overdoses, shootings, natural causes etc but they never see the inside of a hospital so Juliani's comparison is pure bollox......economics seems to drive all decision making from the administration so surely the surge in welfare claimants, nearly 3.5mln in a week, will finally focus minds on how big a crisis this could become for America....
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:24 pm
by Flockwitt
Sensible Stephen wrote:Duff Paddy wrote:Clogs wrote:Raggs wrote:Clogs wrote:There is no doubt those numbers that have died will continue to increase. It might even reach 30 000. BUt there is real doubt now whether this virus is killing at 4% of those infected. That 4% is what has triggered this mass panic.
No. Most predictions have it around 1% or under. What's caused this panic, is the fact that so many require hospital treatment. Which overwhelms the hospitals, leaving many dying without hospital care (and not just covid victims).
Erm no. Most revised predictions are now modelling closer to 1%. The initial reported figure (and remains current) from the WHO was 4%. This was what the panic started on. Extrapolating that 4% onto a nations population resulted in millions dying. Calmer heads are now analysing the information and some commonsense is entering into the discourse.
Yes. And as noted you have people dying of other causes who might well have been saved but for the overwhelmed health service. These people are not being included in Covid stats.
It looks like it’s only 1% if measures are taken, if no measures are taken it seems to be higher as the health service becomes overwhelmed. We have a perfect example of that in Italy that simply cannot be ignored.
Exactly. It looks like, if you manage it such that hospitals are not over whelmed, you can keep the death rate under 1%. If you can't, it goes up, way up.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:34 pm
by goeagles
Tehui wrote:sorCrer wrote:Rudy W. Giuliani
@RudyGiuliani
“Approximately 7500 people die every day in the United States. That’s approximately 645,000 people so far this year. Coronavirus has killed about 1,000 Americans this year. Just a little perspective.”
Somebody tell Rudi what the near future could look like, if the place is not locked down.
US Infection & Death Rate
10 days ago - 4,373 - 75
9 days ago - 5,662 - 96
8 days ago - 8.074 - 122
7 days ago - 12,018 - 174
6 days ago - 17,439 - 229
5 days ago - 23,710 - 296
4 days ago - 32,341 - 405
3 days ago - 42,749 - 516
2 days ago - 52,685 - 670
1 day ago - 64,661 - 929
today - 79,313 - 1,081
We've been doubling every 3 days in the total number of deaths. It's very unlikely to happen, but if we doubled every 3 days for a month (starting with the current 1177 dead), we'd have 1.2 million dead a month from now.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:43 pm
by message #2527204
goeagles wrote:Tehui wrote:sorCrer wrote:Rudy W. Giuliani
@RudyGiuliani
“Approximately 7500 people die every day in the United States. That’s approximately 645,000 people so far this year. Coronavirus has killed about 1,000 Americans this year. Just a little perspective.”
Somebody tell Rudi what the near future could look like, if the place is not locked down.
US Infection & Death Rate
10 days ago - 4,373 - 75
9 days ago - 5,662 - 96
8 days ago - 8.074 - 122
7 days ago - 12,018 - 174
6 days ago - 17,439 - 229
5 days ago - 23,710 - 296
4 days ago - 32,341 - 405
3 days ago - 42,749 - 516
2 days ago - 52,685 - 670
1 day ago - 64,661 - 929
today - 79,313 - 1,081
We've been doubling every 3 days in the total number of deaths. It's very unlikely to happen, but if we doubled every 3 days for a month (starting with the current 1177 dead), we'd have 1.2 million dead a month from now.
And a further 11m requiring critical care.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:46 pm
by Sandstorm
Sweden aren’t doing anything, just carrying on as normal. If the 1% death rate globally turns out to be accurate, Mog is going to be insufferable.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:48 pm
by Gavin Duffy
Sandstorm wrote:Sweden aren’t doing anything, just carrying on as normal. If the 1% death rate globally turns out to be accurate, Mog is going to be insufferable.
Not quite true tbf. They are shielding vulnerable groups as I understand it. And their death rate, as things stand, is about 3%.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:51 pm
by OptimisticJock
For those that were talking about it earlier the masks have dates. The surgical masks in my area were all dated 2016 and the M3 masks 2019
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:51 pm
by camroc1
Gavin Duffy wrote:Sandstorm wrote:Sweden aren’t doing anything, just carrying on as normal. If the 1% death rate globally turns out to be accurate, Mog is going to be insufferable.
Not quite true tbf. They are shielding vulnerable groups as I understand it.
AS tonights Irish death figures show, that's a dangerous game to play.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:57 pm
by goeagles
OptimisticJock wrote:For those that were talking about it earlier the masks have dates. The surgical masks in my area were all dated 2016 and the M3 masks 2019
They are still better than nothing after those dates and probably quite useful still. Drugs have dates too. They're just slightly less potent after the sell by dates.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:59 pm
by comets
USA officially passes China as the most infected..... now Xing Ji will call it the American virus
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:00 am
by RodneyRegis
ScarfaceClaw wrote:Duff Paddy wrote:Sorry, if you (are honest and) earn on average over £50k a year over the past 3 years you get nothing?
Capped at £50k.
What? No.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:02 am
by Sandstorm
Gavin Duffy wrote:Sandstorm wrote:Sweden aren’t doing anything, just carrying on as normal. If the 1% death rate globally turns out to be accurate, Mog is going to be insufferable.
Not quite true tbf. They are shielding vulnerable groups as I understand it. And their death rate, as things stand, is about 3%.
If Europe on average has 20k deaths per country after lockdown method (plus a tanked economy) and Sweden has 40k but everyone still has a job......is that acceptable to the Swedes?
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:03 am
by DOB
Clogs wrote:Raggs wrote:Clogs wrote:There is no doubt those numbers that have died will continue to increase. It might even reach 30 000. BUt there is real doubt now whether this virus is killing at 4% of those infected. That 4% is what has triggered this mass panic.
No. Most predictions have it around 1% or under. What's caused this panic, is the fact that so many require hospital treatment. Which overwhelms the hospitals, leaving many dying without hospital care (and not just covid victims).
Erm no. Most revised predictions are now modelling closer to 1%. The initial reported figure (and remains current) from the WHO was 4%. This was what the panic started on. Extrapolating that 4% onto a nations population resulted in millions dying. Calmer heads are now analysing the information and some commonsense is entering into the discourse.
I never heard 4%.
Even 1% is still millions of people.
The only way to establish if the number is lower than 1% (and maybe it is) would be improved testing. And a lot of the people that are claiming it's below 1% are the same people that didn't think we needed better testing a month ago, or didn't think it would be a big deal.
If better testing and social distancing had been introduced 2-3 weeks ago (in the UK, in the US, etc) then things would get back to normal much quicker.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:05 am
by Clogs
message #2527204 wrote:goeagles wrote:Tehui wrote:sorCrer wrote:Rudy W. Giuliani
@RudyGiuliani
“Approximately 7500 people die every day in the United States. That’s approximately 645,000 people so far this year. Coronavirus has killed about 1,000 Americans this year. Just a little perspective.”
Somebody tell Rudi what the near future could look like, if the place is not locked down.
US Infection & Death Rate
10 days ago - 4,373 - 75
9 days ago - 5,662 - 96
8 days ago - 8.074 - 122
7 days ago - 12,018 - 174
6 days ago - 17,439 - 229
5 days ago - 23,710 - 296
4 days ago - 32,341 - 405
3 days ago - 42,749 - 516
2 days ago - 52,685 - 670
1 day ago - 64,661 - 929
today - 79,313 - 1,081
We've been doubling every 3 days in the total number of deaths. It's very unlikely to happen, but if we doubled every 3 days for a month (starting with the current 1177 dead), we'd have 1.2 million dead a month from now.
And a further 11m requiring critical care.
And if you doubled for just one month more then all of America would be dead and a further 3 billion requiring critical care.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:06 am
by Sandstorm
Clogs wrote:message #2527204 wrote:goeagles wrote:Tehui wrote:sorCrer wrote:Rudy W. Giuliani
@RudyGiuliani
“Approximately 7500 people die every day in the United States. That’s approximately 645,000 people so far this year. Coronavirus has killed about 1,000 Americans this year. Just a little perspective.”
Somebody tell Rudi what the near future could look like, if the place is not locked down.
US Infection & Death Rate
10 days ago - 4,373 - 75
9 days ago - 5,662 - 96
8 days ago - 8.074 - 122
7 days ago - 12,018 - 174
6 days ago - 17,439 - 229
5 days ago - 23,710 - 296
4 days ago - 32,341 - 405
3 days ago - 42,749 - 516
2 days ago - 52,685 - 670
1 day ago - 64,661 - 929
today - 79,313 - 1,081
We've been doubling every 3 days in the total number of deaths. It's very unlikely to happen, but if we doubled every 3 days for a month (starting with the current 1177 dead), we'd have 1.2 million dead a month from now.
And a further 11m requiring critical care.
And if you doubled for just one month more then all of America would be dead and a further 3 billion requiring critical care.
It’s not Ebola
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:07 am
by OptimisticJock
goeagles wrote:OptimisticJock wrote:For those that were talking about it earlier the masks have dates. The surgical masks in my area were all dated 2016 and the M3 masks 2019
They are still better than nothing after those dates and probably quite useful still. Drugs have dates too. They're just slightly less potent after the sell by dates.
So I'm told. Dont think it's much to ask to be properly kitted out though.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:08 am
by camroc1
Clogs wrote:message #2527204 wrote:goeagles wrote:Tehui wrote:sorCrer wrote:Rudy W. Giuliani
@RudyGiuliani
“Approximately 7500 people die every day in the United States. That’s approximately 645,000 people so far this year. Coronavirus has killed about 1,000 Americans this year. Just a little perspective.”
Somebody tell Rudi what the near future could look like, if the place is not locked down.
US Infection & Death Rate
10 days ago - 4,373 - 75
9 days ago - 5,662 - 96
8 days ago - 8.074 - 122
7 days ago - 12,018 - 174
6 days ago - 17,439 - 229
5 days ago - 23,710 - 296
4 days ago - 32,341 - 405
3 days ago - 42,749 - 516
2 days ago - 52,685 - 670
1 day ago - 64,661 - 929
today - 79,313 - 1,081
We've been doubling every 3 days in the total number of deaths. It's very unlikely to happen, but if we doubled every 3 days for a month (starting with the current 1177 dead), we'd have 1.2 million dead a month from now.
And a further 11m requiring critical care.
And if you doubled for just one month more then all of America would be dead and a further 3 billion requiring critical care.
That's the nature of exponential mathematics, but of course the virus would run out of non infected victims to keep propagating at exponential rates long before this.
As noted previously, it is keeping ICU hospitalisation rates below ICU capacity that is key to controlling the situation.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:09 am
by Mr Mike
As the U.S. surged up to 82,404 confirmed COVID-19 cases Thursday, it took the number-one spot from China, which has 81,782 cases, followed by Italy with 80,589 cases. The U.S. now has accounted for about 14.9 percent of cases worldwide.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:12 am
by Maniototo Man
sorCrer wrote:Rudy W. Giuliani
@RudyGiuliani
“Approximately 7500 people die every day in the United States. That’s approximately 645,000 people so far this year. Coronavirus has killed about 1,000 Americans this year. Just a little perspective.”
His recent career has been all about defending the indefensible, so no surprises there.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:14 am
by Maniototo Man
YOYO wrote:Gavin Duffy wrote:US now has largest total of cases.
That’ll blow open the Iranian’s theory that it’s an American created bio weapon designed to fcuk up China and Iran.
It's a Trumpian ruse to try and cover their tracks.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:18 am
by Openside
Those fecking Facebook Ads
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:20 am
by CM11
Clogs wrote:message #2527204 wrote:goeagles wrote:Tehui wrote:sorCrer wrote:Rudy W. Giuliani
@RudyGiuliani
“Approximately 7500 people die every day in the United States. That’s approximately 645,000 people so far this year. Coronavirus has killed about 1,000 Americans this year. Just a little perspective.”
Somebody tell Rudi what the near future could look like, if the place is not locked down.
US Infection & Death Rate
10 days ago - 4,373 - 75
9 days ago - 5,662 - 96
8 days ago - 8.074 - 122
7 days ago - 12,018 - 174
6 days ago - 17,439 - 229
5 days ago - 23,710 - 296
4 days ago - 32,341 - 405
3 days ago - 42,749 - 516
2 days ago - 52,685 - 670
1 day ago - 64,661 - 929
today - 79,313 - 1,081
We've been doubling every 3 days in the total number of deaths. It's very unlikely to happen, but if we doubled every 3 days for a month (starting with the current 1177 dead), we'd have 1.2 million dead a month from now.
And a further 11m requiring critical care.
And if you doubled for just one month more then all of America would be dead and a further 3 billion requiring critical care.
So you've figured out that it'll run out of speed within two months leaving millions of Americans dead and 10s of millions in critical care. Well done.
Oh wait, there aren't 10s of millions of critical beds so change that millions dead to 10s of millions.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:37 am
by JM2K6
Clogs wrote:Again, Wuhan's figures were death rate/confirmed cases = 3.4%. This is a grossly flawed equation. Confirmed cases (those that were tested) was an order of magnitude lower than those that were/are actually infected. To get the true death rate you need to have the true infected rate. Something that is impossible to do, but epidemiologists are nowstarting to model. And gradually they are starting to agree that this % death rate could be far far far below what is currently reported.
Reporting the case fatality rate (as opposed to the death rate in total) is de rigeur here, it's not the gotcha you think it is. A CFR of >1% with a virus that has an R0 of somewhere between 2.5 and 3 is a lot of dead people. No-one really cares about the "true death rate", it's kinda irrelevant to anyone trying to treat it.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:38 am
by hermes-trismegistus
eldanielfire wrote:Interesting tid bit. My friend works as a doctor in a Kent hospital. She says that they still have no masks/PPE. SO the command is do not resuscitate, because doing so could leave the recovered patient coffin out viral particles over non-protected staff. I wondering why haven't the hospitals got their PPE yet? The government claim they have been distributing it all week.
Also the the doctors who are working on the Coronavirus the longest have become seriously ill with it. The new thinking is while the old are most vulnerable for the young it's the volume of viral particles you absorb that matters. Which might be bad for NHS staff.
Viral load. I was reading a paper on this earlier. Seems to be the case that the heavier the exposure the heavier the illness in respect of things like SARS, CV, etc. Makes sense I suppose. Although I have to admit, I’d previously thought from what I’d been hearing that a fleeting brush against an infected door handle was every bit as dangerous as a pair of infectees coughing in your face for ten minutes. Apparently not so clearcut. Grey areas.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:38 am
by Clogs
CM11 wrote:Clogs wrote:message #2527204 wrote:goeagles wrote:Tehui wrote:
Somebody tell Rudi what the near future could look like, if the place is not locked down.
US Infection & Death Rate
10 days ago - 4,373 - 75
9 days ago - 5,662 - 96
8 days ago - 8.074 - 122
7 days ago - 12,018 - 174
6 days ago - 17,439 - 229
5 days ago - 23,710 - 296
4 days ago - 32,341 - 405
3 days ago - 42,749 - 516
2 days ago - 52,685 - 670
1 day ago - 64,661 - 929
today - 79,313 - 1,081
We've been doubling every 3 days in the total number of deaths. It's very unlikely to happen, but if we doubled every 3 days for a month (starting with the current 1177 dead), we'd have 1.2 million dead a month from now.
And a further 11m requiring critical care.
And if you doubled for just one month more then all of America would be dead and a further 3 billion requiring critical care.
So you've figured out that it'll run out of speed within two months leaving millions of Americans dead and 10s of millions in critical care. Well done.
Oh wait, there aren't 10s of millions of critical beds so change that millions dead to 10s of millions.
Way to miss the obvious sarcastic point.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:40 am
by Enzedder
CM11 wrote:Clogs wrote:
So you've figured out that it'll run out of speed within two months leaving millions of Americans dead and 10s of millions in critical care. Well done.
Oh wait, there aren't 10s of millions of critical beds so change that millions dead to 10s of millions.
Clogsy doesn't care as long as the BottleO is still open and he can get a haircut.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:42 am
by JM2K6
hermes-trismegistus wrote:eldanielfire wrote:Interesting tid bit. My friend works as a doctor in a Kent hospital. She says that they still have no masks/PPE. SO the command is do not resuscitate, because doing so could leave the recovered patient coffin out viral particles over non-protected staff. I wondering why haven't the hospitals got their PPE yet? The government claim they have been distributing it all week.
Also the the doctors who are working on the Coronavirus the longest have become seriously ill with it. The new thinking is while the old are most vulnerable for the young it's the volume of viral particles you absorb that matters. Which might be bad for NHS staff.
Viral load. I was reading a paper on this earlier. Seems to be the case that the heavier the exposure the heavier the illness in respect of things like SARS, CV, etc. Makes sense I suppose. Although I have to admit, I’d previously thought from what I’d been hearing that a fleeting brush against an infected door handle was every bit as dangerous as a pair of infectees coughing in your face for ten minutes. Apparently not so clearcut. Grey areas.
Door handle -> touching face = you get infected.
How badly you handle being infected is down to a number of factors, not all of which are understood it seems, but increasing the viral load simply makes it harder for your body to fight it.
Which is why if you're sharing a place with someone, if they get sick you shouldn't just go "oh well I guess I'll be getting it" - you have to try and isolate them because if you do get sick, the two of you do not want to be increasing the viral load for each other.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:42 am
by JM2K6
Clogs wrote:Way to miss the obvious sarcastic point.
What is it about exponential growth that you're not getting?
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:46 am
by Clogs
JM2K6 wrote:Clogs wrote:Again, Wuhan's figures were death rate/confirmed cases = 3.4%. This is a grossly flawed equation. Confirmed cases (those that were tested) was an order of magnitude lower than those that were/are actually infected. To get the true death rate you need to have the true infected rate. Something that is impossible to do, but epidemiologists are nowstarting to model. And gradually they are starting to agree that this % death rate could be far far far below what is currently reported.
Reporting the case fatality rate (as opposed to the death rate in total) is de rigeur here, it's not the gotcha you think it is. A CFR of >1% with a virus that has an R0 of somewhere between 2.5 and 3 is a lot of dead people. No-one really cares about the "true death rate", it's kinda irrelevant to anyone trying to treat it.
Good point, but what it does help with is actually planning for your worst case scenario a lot more accurately. There is a natural high water mark with infections. If you can calculate the infection rate, then apply the recovery rate(herd immunity) then apply the % gravely ill (at risk of death) it allows you to predict when the worst will occur and what it will look like and allow you to plan accordingly.
If the actual death rate is 1% then we are fvcked. However none of the data is starting to back that up. If anything the modelling is starting to show that it is magnitutdes lower than that. When applied to Italy you can see they have already peaked (as most of their population was likely infected before lockdown) and with social distancing and herd immunity they are almost out of the woods. Estimates are showing that Italy has millions that have been infected (and many/most will have recovered - if the virus is out of our system in 14 days). They will not suffer millions of deaths.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:58 am
by Clogs
JM2K6 wrote:Clogs wrote:Way to miss the obvious sarcastic point.
What is it about exponential growth that you're not getting?
Well there is exponential growth up to a limit. In the ridiculous example I provided, I was trying to show that simply applying exponential growth to this problem is not how it works. If it did then all of America would be dead and 3 Billion more Americans would need intensive care...
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:01 am
by Clogs
JM2K6 wrote:Clogs wrote:Way to miss the obvious sarcastic point.
What is it about exponential growth that you're not getting?
I have tried to model the exponential growth. I have also tried to add in the recovery rate. Because as that increases that should dramatically slow the number of infections (herd immunity). If you apply this logic to Italy and then work out their death rate you may get an idea of just how many people are or have been infected. This is back of the envelope stuff.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:04 am
by TheFrog
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:06 am
by Clogs
Enzedder wrote:CM11 wrote:Clogs wrote:
So you've figured out that it'll run out of speed within two months leaving millions of Americans dead and 10s of millions in critical care. Well done.
Oh wait, there aren't 10s of millions of critical beds so change that millions dead to 10s of millions.
Clogsy doesn't care as long as the BottleO is still open and he can get a haircut.
Fvck that. I can wear a ponytail if I have to. If you cose the Bottle-O we will have fvcking riots! I will lead the charge.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:30 am
by goeagles
Clogs wrote:JM2K6 wrote:Clogs wrote:Way to miss the obvious sarcastic point.
What is it about exponential growth that you're not getting?
Well there is exponential growth up to a limit. In the ridiculous example I provided, I was trying to show that simply applying exponential growth to this problem is not how it works. If it did then all of America would be dead and 3 Billion more Americans would need intensive care...
Viruses follow logistic growth curves. Logistic curves are very close to exponential growth in early stages, which we still are in as a very low percentage of people have actually caught the virus.
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:30 am
by Yer Man
comets wrote:USA officially passes China as the most infected..... now Xing Ji will call it the American virus
I thought Trümp wanted to stop imports from China
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:36 am
by Clogs
goeagles wrote:Clogs wrote:JM2K6 wrote:Clogs wrote:Way to miss the obvious sarcastic point.
What is it about exponential growth that you're not getting?
Well there is exponential growth up to a limit. In the ridiculous example I provided, I was trying to show that simply applying exponential growth to this problem is not how it works. If it did then all of America would be dead and 3 Billion more Americans would need intensive care...
Viruses follow logistic growth curves. Logistic curves are very close to exponential growth in early stages, which
we still are in as a very low percentage of people have actually caught the virus.
Are you sure?
The epidemic started in China sometime in November or December. The first confirmed U.S. cases included a person who traveled from Wuhan on Jan. 15, and it is likely that the virus entered before that: Tens of thousands of people traveled from Wuhan to the U.S. in December. Existing evidence suggests that the virus is highly transmissible and that the number of infections doubles roughly every three days. An epidemic seed on Jan. 1 implies that by March 9 about six million people in the U.S. would have been infected. As of March 23, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 499 Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. If our surmise of six million cases is accurate, that’s a mortality rate of 0.01%, assuming a two week lag between infectio
Dr. Bendavid and Dr. Bhattacharya are professors of medicine at Stanford. Neeraj Sood contributed to this article
Some very smart people seem to think the infection rate is actually quite high...
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:53 am
by TheFrog
The question is therefore: if a large amount of the population is or has been infected and the virus is therefore not the lethal, why are hospitals saturated with severe cases and why do we see daily more deaths than during a flu epidemic?
Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:53 am
by Sensible Stephen
Clogs wrote:goeagles wrote:Clogs wrote:JM2K6 wrote:Clogs wrote:Way to miss the obvious sarcastic point.
What is it about exponential growth that you're not getting?
Well there is exponential growth up to a limit. In the ridiculous example I provided, I was trying to show that simply applying exponential growth to this problem is not how it works. If it did then all of America would be dead and 3 Billion more Americans would need intensive care...
Viruses follow logistic growth curves. Logistic curves are very close to exponential growth in early stages, which
we still are in as a very low percentage of people have actually caught the virus.
Are you sure?
The epidemic started in China sometime in November or December. The first confirmed U.S. cases included a person who traveled from Wuhan on Jan. 15, and it is likely that the virus entered before that: Tens of thousands of people traveled from Wuhan to the U.S. in December. Existing evidence suggests that the virus is highly transmissible and that the number of infections doubles roughly every three days. An epidemic seed on Jan. 1 implies that by March 9 about six million people in the U.S. would have been infected. As of March 23, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 499 Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. If our surmise of six million cases is accurate, that’s a mortality rate of 0.01%, assuming a two week lag between infectio
Dr. Bendavid and Dr. Bhattacharya are professors of medicine at Stanford. Neeraj Sood contributed to this article
Some very smart people seem to think the infection rate is actually quite high...
I am sure well all hope that is the case, as that would be great.
But look at the Korean data. Look at the death rates there. The Korean data is probably the most accurate data we have right now due to the range and scope of their testing. Their death rate is 1.4%. 13.6% in those over 80, 6.4% in those over 70, 1.7% in those over 60. Those are not numbers to just wave away.