COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 39

starting strength gym
Page 39 of 2476 FirstFirst ... 29373839404149891395391039 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 390 of 24756

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #381
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    50,081

    Default

    • starting strength seminar december 2022
    • starting strength seminar february 2023
    • starting strength seminar april 2023
    Lazygun: Here's some data. It will not be sufficiently hysterical.

    Evidence over hysteria — COVID-19 - Six Four Six Nine - Medium

    “Reasonable estimates for the case fatality ratio in the general U.S. population vary from 0.05% to 1%.”
    Looking at the US fatality, the fatality rate is drastically declining as the number of cases increases, halving every four or five days. The fatality rate will eventually level off and plateau as the US case-mix becomes apparent.
    4.06% March 8 (22 deaths of 541 cases)
    3.69% March 9 (26 of 704)
    3.01% March 10 (30 of 994)
    2.95% March 11 (38 of 1,295)
    2.52% March 12 (42 of 1,695)
    2.27% March 13 (49 of 2,247)
    1.93% March 14 (57 of 2,954)
    1.84% March 15 (68 of 3,680)
    1.90% March 16 (86 of 4,503)
    1.76% March 17 (109 of 6,196)
    1.66% March 18 (150 of 9,003)
    1.51% March 19th (208 of 13,789)
    1.32% March 20th (256 of 19,383)

  2. #382
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    RS WY
    Posts
    980

    Default

    Germany seems to have -- sorry, Rip; fuck, this is a hard habit to break -- definitely has a much better established, and still abnormally low, raw CFR of about 0.4% (84 deaths, 22213 cases).
    And does this definitely include that 100% of individuals who are infected were definitely tested and the 22,213 cases definitely is totally an accurate indication of the total number of people who are definitely infected so the devisor of the mortality rate equation is definitely 100% correct so there is definitely no doubt that the total mortality modeling projections are definitely based on an accurate mortality rate?

    Or is it definitely possible that 22,213 cases definitely doesn’t even come close to the total number of infections and that actually that number definitely could possibly be in the millions which would definitely make the actual mortality rate more on the magnitude of 0.000x% which is definitely not as ”bad” as 1% or 0.4% and like a small error in angle is magnified significantly over greater and greater distances the modeled predictions could be way off?

    Because after all it definitely would sure be a shame to destroy human civilization as we previously knew it because somebody forgot to carry the 1?

    It’s like an exercise in how to make relatively small numbers seem ginormous. Wish I could do that with my bank account and penis length...

  3. #383
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Lazygun: Here's some data. It will not be sufficiently hysterical.

    Evidence over hysteria — COVID-19 - Six Four Six Nine - Medium

    “Reasonable estimates for the case fatality ratio in the general U.S. population vary from 0.05% to 1%.”
    Looking at the US fatality, the fatality rate is drastically declining as the number of cases increases, halving every four or five days. The fatality rate will eventually level off and plateau as the US case-mix becomes apparent.
    4.06% March 8 (22 deaths of 541 cases)
    3.69% March 9 (26 of 704)
    3.01% March 10 (30 of 994)
    2.95% March 11 (38 of 1,295)
    2.52% March 12 (42 of 1,695)
    2.27% March 13 (49 of 2,247)
    1.93% March 14 (57 of 2,954)
    1.84% March 15 (68 of 3,680)
    1.90% March 16 (86 of 4,503)
    1.76% March 17 (109 of 6,196)
    1.66% March 18 (150 of 9,003)
    1.51% March 19th (208 of 13,789)
    1.32% March 20th (256 of 19,383)
    Rip, any thoughts on what individuals should do to protect their businesses and families now that the other side has entrenched itself? The powers-that-be have communicated to me that they are committed to shutting things down at least two more months.

    I'm telling the people around me to reach out to their fellow business owners and start talking. A government fine is going to be a small change if business closes. Other people's lack of responsibility has now become my problem.

  4. #384
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe;1765501[url=https://medium.com/six-four-six-nine/evidence-over-hysteria-covid-19-1b767def5894
    Evidence over hysteria — COVID-19 - Six Four Six Nine - Medium[/url]
    His article was taken down. It is now under investigation by the free speech experts at Medium.

  5. #385
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    311

    Default

    COVID-19 - Evidence Over Hysteria | Zero Hedge

    There's a mirror to Aaron Ginn's article. Funny how freedom of speech is important until it isn't.

  6. #386
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Waskis View Post
    Do you have a hypothesis for why there are such different mortality rates? Age? Air pollution? Personal hygiene? Smoking? Healthcare quality? Ambient temperature/humidity? Genetics? Data collection/reporting? Some combination?
    Early in a country's epidemic, the death rate per positive test depends on how many tests are being done.

    In the UK, until recently, we were only testing hospitalised patients - already severely sick people, so death rate of these is high.

    Germany have been testing much more widely (people with a cough, etc.). Most of these will have mild illness, so low death rate per positive test.

    Incidentally Germany's approach is better from an epidemic control perspective.

    Once the epidemic has gone exponential, the death rate is also heavily influenced by how overwhelmed the hospitals are. If you have 100 intensive care beds and 200 patients who need them, 100 of those patients will die (actually around 90%). Being exponential, you expect around 400 patients a few days later - so 300 die. This is the situation in Italy right now.

    The data is of course imperfect, since it's a rapidly evolving situation.

    What is not debatable is that, unchecked, this thing will collapse your health system, and eventually will cause lots of people to die who wouldn't otherwise (eg, everyone who would normally have got that ICU bed because of a heart attack, etc.).

    There have been a lot of inaccurate comments here about Northern Italy's health system. By many measures, before this crisis, it was among the best in the world. If you think the American system has exponentially more capacity or resilience, you're wrong. That's the thing about exponential epidemics - even twice or four times surge capacity isn't going to save you running out of ICU beds.

    There's a reasonable debate to be had about whether the economic costs of the measures to prevent this happening are worthwhile for society overall. But it's just nonsense to pretend that there aren't difficult trade offs here.

  7. #387
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Please note:
    "Last week alone, 400 people died in Bergamo and 12 neighboring towns — four times the number who died the same week the previous year, according to the Bergamo mayor’s office. Only 91 of those had tested positive for the virus."
    Italian mayors concerned coronavirus death toll doesn’t tell whole story | Globalnews.ca

    Ask a life insurance company what the odds are that deaths will jump 300% anywhere. Corona deaths are being seriously under-counted. Or maybe there are dozens of serial killers loose in Bergamo.

  8. #388
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    2,907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazygun37 View Post
    Just so I'm clear on this. The people who are telling us to "throw our economy into the toilet as well as our freedom and liberty" are the epidemiologists and public health officials studying the outbreak. So those are all climate-activist, Hillary-loving, globalist-hating, anti-Trumper social justice warriors? I genuinely did not realize this. Could you point me to the relevant source?
    Medical professionals don’t make policy. They offer expert opinions. I suspect they are telling us what is the best thing to do from a medical perspective with little regard to other factors such as cost, economy, social norms, and dozens of other TBD consequences.

    Leaders, have to make decisions as systematic trade offs. Not a science. They need to consider things like what to do with homeless people, prisoners, and deep and instant unemployment.

    Given that the media thrives on sensationalism, embellishment, and extremism, the population has become hysterical.

    Furthermore, hysterical thinking has become the norm.

    This perfect storm of ingredients and the dubious record of recent declarations of crisis, tipped local and global decisions towards an extreme response. Once in motion, it got out of control.

  9. #389
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Lazygun: Here's some data. It will not be sufficiently hysterical.

    Evidence over hysteria — COVID-19 - Six Four Six Nine - Medium
    This morning I get a 404 error for that Medium post. The error message says it violated content rules. Odd, since I was able to read it last night. It seemed like a dispassionate analysis of available data. But I didn’t finish the article. Did it go non-linear at the end?

    Vince

  10. #390
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    95

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Lazygun: Here's some data. It will not be sufficiently hysterical.

    Evidence over hysteria — COVID-19 - Six Four Six Nine - Medium

    “Reasonable estimates for the case fatality ratio in the general U.S. population vary from 0.05% to 1%.”
    Looking at the US fatality, the fatality rate is drastically declining as the number of cases increases, halving every four or five days. The fatality rate will eventually level off and plateau as the US case-mix becomes apparent.
    4.06% March 8 (22 deaths of 541 cases)
    3.69% March 9 (26 of 704)
    3.01% March 10 (30 of 994)
    2.95% March 11 (38 of 1,295)
    2.52% March 12 (42 of 1,695)
    2.27% March 13 (49 of 2,247)
    1.93% March 14 (57 of 2,954)
    1.84% March 15 (68 of 3,680)
    1.90% March 16 (86 of 4,503)
    1.76% March 17 (109 of 6,196)
    1.66% March 18 (150 of 9,003)
    1.51% March 19th (208 of 13,789)
    1.32% March 20th (256 of 19,383)
    Alright, Rip. So this is the evidence on which you are staking your position, right? OK then, let's take a look.

    I think I mentioned before that I do stats and modelling in my line of research all the time, so I couldn't resist taking this data set, plus similar ones for different countries, and simply plotting it in a sensible manner. Here is the result (excuse the shitty quality -- your site doesn't let me upload a higher-quality version):

    mortality.jpg

    Let's go through this, shall we? The top panel shows the number of reported cases and deaths in the US, starting from the time of the first reported death. The bottom panel shows the corresponding raw Case Fatality Rate (Deaths/Cases). In this panel I've also plotted the same raw CFRs for several other major countries in exactly the same way.

    The diagonal lines in both panels are simple linear fits to the data points. Since the y-axis is logarithmic, and the x-axis is not, a straight line here corresponds to exponential growth or decay. Nobody in their right mind should take these extrapolations all that seriously, but since you are apparently pretty happy to extrapolate far more wildly than that -- i.e. guess -- those lines might at least give us some vague indication of the trend we're on.

    The thick horizontal line in the bottom panel is 0.1%. That's a little higher than the seasonal flu, so let's use that as a benchmark COVID-19.

    So, what are the take-home points from this?

    • First, the good news: you're right that the current trend in mortality within the US is downwards. In fact, if it continued to decline at this rate, we would reach flu-level mortality rates within only 43 days. So what's there to worry about, right?
    • Well, here is the bad news: if you use the same silly extrapolation for the case and death rates on which this CFR is based, you see that within those same 43 days, there would be 250,000 deaths and 250 million cases. Let's put this into perspective:
      • The seasonal flu typically kills around 30,000 people each year.
      • Current estimates of COVID-19 hospitalization rates are ~10% - 20%. So these numbers would imply 25+ million hospital patients within the next couple of months.
      • It's obviously absurd to think our system could deal with this -- what would happen instead is that the mortality rate would increase dramatically as the worst cases are no longer treated at all, while what should have been mild cases become critical.
      • At the same time the same hospitals are of course also still trying to treat non-COVID-19 cases, and it would be silly to think the mortality among those would not increase when the system is simply flooded like this.
    • But there is more bad news: all those other lines in the CFR plot show that it's just completely unrealistic to think this number will ever approach flu-like levels. Even Germany's abnormally low rate is higher than this, and it is increasing.

    Is this really your best justification for telling everybody that this is all just one big over-reaction?

    By the way, for somebody who loathes politicians, you sure seems to share at least one of their most frustrating traits: answering the question you wish you had been asked -- or not answering the question at all.

    So, one more time, and in the light of your own favourite numbers: are you competely, utterly certain that this epidemic isn't really a big deal and that this is all just mass hysteria? If so, let's have the next set of evidence please. If not, what is the point of keeping restaurants open right now? Are you going to force people to go to work and socialize once they are actually scared to do so, and not because of the media or the government, but because many people around them are sick and or dead? I am still waiting to hear your solution.

    Just so we are clear: the linear fits/extrapolations in those plots are purely for illustration. This is not what real epidemiologists do (because I'm not one of them). But I thought it was useful to at least force people to engage with the actual numbers. (I'll be happy to make my code and the data I used available to anybody who wants to look at it for themselves.) I really hope and think these trends won't continue like this -- but the way to make sure they don't is to stop putting our heads in the sand.
    Attached Images Attached Images

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •