Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    • CommentAuthorBigOilRep
    • CommentTimeApr 15th 2020
     
    Posted By: alsetalokin
    Posted By: BigOilRep
    Posted By: alsetalokinUsing today's USA numbers on worldometers, there have been 3,142,244 tests performed so far, and 618,893 total cases identified, and 26,334 deaths. The deaths per case numbers yield a CFR of around 4.3 percent. Assuming one test per person and a population of 327,000,000, we can estimate a prevalence of about 20 percent, giving an estimated total of 65,400,000 infected. Say 80 percent of those do not present clinically. That leaves around 13,080,000 hospitalizations. Applying the astonishing CFR of 4.3 per cent to that figure gives a bit over 560,000 deaths expected in the USA in this first wave of the pandemic.

    Please tell me I'm wrong.

    You are wrong.


    Whew, that's a relief.

    Care to show your working?

    I was just responding to your polite plea :)

    Seriously though, the sample of people who have been tested significantly biased, massively so in fact. If you are asymptomatic (which some experts think might be up to 50% of infected) then you don't get tested and if you only have mild symptoms (like the majority of people) you are just told to self isolate until better - again not tested. The USA is quickly running out of test kits - they aren't using them up on some 18 year old who felt a bit hot for a couple of days. There are likely 10s of millions of people who have had the infection, not 600k.

    Also, we don't know how many people have been tested from your figures. Three million tests done is not the same as three million people tested - it's likely to be a lot less as hospital patients and front line staff are sometimes tested every day, especially if they have a positive test already. Maybe that's only a million people tested? I've no idea, as I couldn't find that data.

    The CFR seems to be homing in around 0.3-0.4% where they have carried out extensive testing, or done 100% population tests (like the town in Germany). Of course that depends on how many vulnerable people you have in the first place. A hypothetical city of 16 year olds would barely lose anyone (more like to knife each other to death, at least here), whereas somewhere like Lombardy...

    I'm not trying to downplay it, 0.4% CFR for something that spreads like wildfire is clearly an absolute shit show.
  1.  
    Well, if the tests are being given to only people with symptoms or frontline hospital staff, and the positive test rate is only 20 percent, doesn't that mean that lots of false negatives are occurring?
    But you are right about that one assumption at least. A "recovered" patient will generally have had at least three tests: one on intake (positive) and two at discharge 24 hours apart (negative). But the dead may only have had one or even none, so some of that cancels out.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeApr 15th 2020
     
    Nunavut.
    So far , anyway
  2.  
    “Here's all she had to say about death: "Oh my, oh my.”
    ― Kurt Vonnegut, Breakfast of Champions
    •  
      CommentAuthorgoatcheez
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2020
     
    Tip leads police to 17 bodies at a New Jersey nursing home

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/us/bodies-found-new-jersey-nursing-home/index.html
  3.  
    Hiding bodies is one logical consequence of for-profit healthcare.

    ->Dumb Yanks
    •  
      CommentAuthoraber0der
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2020
     
    Peek-a-boo.
    •  
      CommentAuthoralsetalokin
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020 edited
     
    Prevalence data from New York indicates approx. 14 percent have antibodies. This brings the CFR in NY down to about 0.5 percent.

    If full herd immunity needs about 60 percent then four times the current total fatalities may be expected in NY.

    And nationwide... almost a million deaths before this wave is over ?

    ETA: Looking at the linear-linear plot of total deaths, I predict that the 1 million deaths mark will be attained around the end of July. Just in time for the second wave to become apparent.
    • CommentAuthorBigOilRep
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020
     
    Posted By: alsetalokinPrevalence data from New York indicates approx. 14 percent have antibodies. This brings the CFR in NY down to about 0.5 percent.

    If full herd immunity needs about 60 percent then four times the current total fatalities may be expected in NY.


    It gets a bit more complicated than that. The mortality is not evenly distributed across the population, far from it - over 90% of deaths occur in people over 60 years old (and many dying under 60 have comorbidities) .

    So theoretically you could infect everyone under 60 leaving over 70% of the population with antibodies and a much smaller number of deaths than the crude estimate (especially if you also protected those with preexisting conditions).

    How this would work in practice, I've no idea. However I suspect there will be staggered return to work, with the youngest "unlocking" first. Schools would be first back in operation, as children barely notice the thing.
    •  
      CommentAuthorGrowler
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020
     
    Posted By: BigOilRepHow this would work in practice, I've no idea. However I suspect there will be staggered return to work, with the youngest "unlocking" first. Schools would be first back in operation, as children barely notice the thing.


    But only if they have very young, fit, teachers? It would be a good way to wipe out the wealth of experience in the teaching profession - fill their workplace with asymptomatic young carriers who WON'T socially distance themselves whatever they (the teachers) try to do....
    • CommentAuthorBigOilRep
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020
     
    Posted By: Growler
    Posted By: BigOilRepHow this would work in practice, I've no idea. However I suspect there will be staggered return to work, with the youngest "unlocking" first. Schools would be first back in operation, as children barely notice the thing.


    But only if they have very young, fit, teachers? It would be a good way to wipe out the wealth of experience in the teaching profession - fill their workplace with asymptomatic young carriers who WON'T socially distance themselves whatever they (the teachers) try to do....

    The great majority of teachers are under 60, but those with comorbidities should obviously stay away or be risk assessed in some way.

    This would all need to be done with extensive testing, contact tracing and isolating the symptomatic. The fact is we can't lock down for ever, and schools have to get back in operation. It might not be next week, or next month but it will happen and we have to work out the safest way to do that.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDuracell
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020 edited
     
    Posted By: BigOilRep
    Posted By: Growler
    Posted By: BigOilRepHow this would work in practice, I've no idea. However I suspect there will be staggered return to work, with the youngest "unlocking" first. Schools would be first back in operation, as children barely notice the thing.


    But only if they have very young, fit, teachers? It would be a good way to wipe out the wealth of experience in the teaching profession - fill their workplace with asymptomatic young carriers who WON'T socially distance themselves whatever they (the teachers) try to do....

    The great majority of teachers are under 60, but those with comorbidities should obviously stay away or be risk assessed in some way.

    This would all need to be done with extensive testing, contact tracing and isolating the symptomatic. The fact is we can't lock down for ever, and schools have to get back in operation. It might not be next week, or next month but it will happen and we have to work out the safest way to do that.
    Social distancing will be very difficult to implement in schools, especially for younger children. "Unlocking" the children in schools first would also unlock their parents and siblings, their teachers and their teachers' spouses, children and parents, etc.

    It might make more sense to first ease up on unnecessary restrictions (e.g. you can go for an unnecessary drive or walk just to get out of the house as long as you maintain social distancing), and then to try to "unlock" the places where social distancing can more easily and feasibly be implemented and maintained (e.g. shops and workplaces that, by virtue of the types of work being done there and the physical layout of the premises involved, can easily and feasibly accommodate and facilitate social distancing between staff and customers), before then moving on to the more difficult challenges such as pubs, restaurants, schools and sporting events etc.

    All the while keeping a close eye on the numbers of new cases and standing ready to rapidly isolate, quarantine and contact trace them, and reimpose harsher restrictions again as might be required, etc. ...

    When do you think the riots will kick off in earnest? My prediction for the UK is June ...
    • CommentAuthorBigOilRep
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020 edited
     
    Posted By: DuracellSocial distancing will be very difficult to implement in schools, especially for younger children. "Unlocking" the children in schools first would also unlock their parents and siblings, their teachers and their teachers' spouses, children and parents, etc.

    It might make more sense to first ease up on unnecessary restrictions (e.g. you can go for an unnecessary drive or walk just to get out of the house as long as you maintain social distancing), and then to try to "unlock" the places where social distancing can more easily and feasibly be implemented and maintained (e.g. shops and workplaces that, by virtue of the types of work being done there and the physical layout of the premises involved, can easily and feasibly accommodate and facilitate social distancing between staff and customers), before then moving on to the more difficult challenges such as pubs, restaurants, schools and sporting events etc.

    Makes sense I think, however a number of European countries are starting to open schools pretty soon. What we need more than anything is a plan - whatever it is. My wife's school is desperate for some kind of guidance - some dates to plan around.


    When do you think the riots will kick off in earnest? My prediction for the UK is June ...

    I don't think we will have riots, though that really depends on how long the lockdown and how severe the economic impact will be. At the moment the lockdown has 90% support, but obviously that will fade as businesses fold, people run out of money and not being able to socialise becomes intolerable to some.

    I can see social unrest and protests kicking off, though I think the government will relax the guidelines long before anything you might call a riot. Then again, the higher then unemployment (especially among the young), the more chance you have of serious unrest. The aftermath will to be handled very carefully.
  4.  
    Children's schools and day cares should be the _last_ places to open up. In fact they should remain closed until a vaccine is widely in use.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020
     
    Well, we hardly need more ignorance. Maybe a compromise...?
    • CommentAuthorBigOilRep
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020
     
    Posted By: alsetalokinChildren's schools and day cares should be the _last_ places to open up. In fact they should remain closed until a vaccine is widely in use.


    Why? There is very little evidence that they contribute significantly to spread and the kids themselves are pretty much unaffected by it.

    And you can't leave schools closed for years on end - it's already causing long term damage to kids futures.
    •  
      CommentAuthoralsetalokin
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020 edited
     
    I see no reason why, in this modern day and age, the kids cannot use their network devices to attend virtual classes, perform and turn in homework, and et cetera. They are on the damn phones most of the time anyway, in school or not. There is however considerable evidence that schools full of children are breeding grounds for all kinds of diseases, like common colds and influenza. If you don't believe we adults get sick from our children bringing home diseases from school, I just don't know what to say to you. "Ostrich" is not a verb.
    • CommentAuthorAsterix
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020
     
    I can see how distance learning might work for children of grades 6-12, but young children have different needs.

    Of course, as a starter, you'd have to make sure that everyone had access (e.g. internet and computer). I don't see that happening any time soon. Mobile phones? I live about two miles outside of city limits and I get one bar of 3G service and no usable internet speed--I have to use Wifi for that.

    Many don't realize how technologically underdeveloped the US is. Heck, Lithuania has better internet penetration.
    • CommentAuthorBigOilRep
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020 edited
     
    Posted By: alsetalokinI see no reason why, in this modern day and age, the kids cannot use their network devices to attend virtual classes, perform and turn in homework,

    It's actually nowhere near as good as classroom teaching. My wife has been delivering virtual lessons - a French class she took today had 16 out of 28 in there. But all she can do is go over old stuff, spelling and vocab. Teaching new stuff is almost impossible, as you simply can't get proper communication going - it's impossible for her to know whether kids have understood stuff, and a 1 hour lesson would take like 3 hours to deliver. So it's better than nothing, but a fraction of the intensity you get in real classroom teaching. She says Google classroom is actually excellent though.

    Also schools serve all sorts of vital functions, they don't just shovel education into their heads. For a start, they look after kids all day so their parents can work. This includes all the health care workers who can't juggle the long hours of their jobs with looking after children

    It's generally agreed that closing schools has some effect on the spread of seasonal flu, however the degree of effect is actually highly debated. There are no randomised trials to turn to, so the data is open to interpretation.

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/316203/School_Closures_Evidence_review.pdf

    The Lancet has a good paper discussing school closures in relation to C-19

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(20)30095-X/fulltext


    If you don't believe we adults get sick from our children bringing home diseases from school, I just don't know what to say to you. "Ostrich" is not a verb.

    Opening schools will lead to an increase in the spread, without a doubt, however plenty of experts think it will be pretty marginal. Some don't. Take your pick.

    However pretty much everyone thinks we can't have indefinite lockdown and school closure - you're Ostriching if you think that can happen. Yes, we need mass testing and contact tracing in first, but it will have to happen.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDuracell
    • CommentTimeApr 24th 2020 edited
     
    Closing our schools early here seems to have helped us to slow down and contain the spread of covid-19 in the community here. The nursing home situation here OTOH is dire ...