|
Post by catcherman22 on Apr 5, 2020 12:39:34 GMT -5
Basically what I am gathering here is that optimism and positive futures go out the window, huh? I am not taking this situation any less seriously than most; in fact I have been hinging on the side of most cautious. I am not seeing my older relatives and am only leaving my house once a week for groceries, but let's try to be positive here and look at the numbers of Corona as a stand alone case and not past trends of other pandemics. I double majored in both accounting and economics with a minor in finance. Analysing trends of numbers and projecting bell curves from a sample of data is my forte. I am not saying to lose vigilance in this situation, in fact these next two weeks are the most testing thus far, but in 5-6 weeks you all will probably be pleasantly surprised how much progress has been made. All people see is the number of cases skyrocketing.... ignoring the fact that the numbers tested is also skyrocketing, which explains the increase in cases. I'll continue to argue that this has been blown out of proportion by the media... and people are starting to see that with the doomsday predictions that were being made. \PS Not saying its not dangerous or we shouldn't be taking precautions... just that the media has made this worse than it actually is.
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 5, 2020 12:50:58 GMT -5
Basically what I am gathering here is that optimism and positive futures go out the window, huh? I am not taking this situation any less seriously than most; in fact I have been hinging on the side of most cautious. I am not seeing my older relatives and am only leaving my house once a week for groceries, but let's try to be positive here and look at the numbers of Corona as a stand alone case and not past trends of other pandemics. I double majored in both accounting and economics with a minor in finance. Analysing trends of numbers and projecting bell curves from a sample of data is my forte. I am not saying to lose vigilance in this situation, in fact these next two weeks are the most testing thus far, but in 5-6 weeks you all will probably be pleasantly surprised how much progress has been made. It will definitely be MUCH better in 5-6 weeks. It will have been close to 3 months by that point. Don't think anybody disagrees with that timeframe. Unless your plea for more optimism is a very recent one in the thread, the ones earlier on and in the previous thread were being "pessimistic" in the face of people saying "it's just flu" or "barely any people are going to die," AND that was in the context of there NOT being lockdowns. All of that "optimism" has been made to look very silly now. Now that this is being treated with the correct amount of seriousness and lockdowns have been enforced, or at least encouraged, we can hope it won't be a disaster. So I'm all for the optimism, I'm being optimistic too! But that's because the proper decisions are FINALLY being made. And there's still some, rightly so in my opinion, anger on how long it's taken, and how bad the leadership has been in many countries.
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 5, 2020 12:52:37 GMT -5
Basically what I am gathering here is that optimism and positive futures go out the window, huh? I am not taking this situation any less seriously than most; in fact I have been hinging on the side of most cautious. I am not seeing my older relatives and am only leaving my house once a week for groceries, but let's try to be positive here and look at the numbers of Corona as a stand alone case and not past trends of other pandemics. I double majored in both accounting and economics with a minor in finance. Analysing trends of numbers and projecting bell curves from a sample of data is my forte. I am not saying to lose vigilance in this situation, in fact these next two weeks are the most testing thus far, but in 5-6 weeks you all will probably be pleasantly surprised how much progress has been made. All people see is the number of cases skyrocketing.... ignoring the fact that the numbers tested is also skyrocketing, which explains the increase in cases. I'll continue to argue that this has been blown out of proportion by the media... and people are starting to see that with the doomsday predictions that were being made. \PS Not saying its not dangerous or we shouldn't be taking precautions... just that the media has made this worse than it actually is. Once again, the "doomsday" scenarios were with NO lockdowns. The numbers are more than you said they were going to be in that previous thread.
|
|
|
Post by catcherman22 on Apr 5, 2020 13:22:34 GMT -5
All people see is the number of cases skyrocketing.... ignoring the fact that the numbers tested is also skyrocketing, which explains the increase in cases. I'll continue to argue that this has been blown out of proportion by the media... and people are starting to see that with the doomsday predictions that were being made. \PS Not saying its not dangerous or we shouldn't be taking precautions... just that the media has made this worse than it actually is. Once again, the "doomsday" scenarios were with NO lockdowns. The numbers are more than you said they were going to be in that previous thread. I'd also argue that those are also not true... that can be seen as evidenced by states with no lockdowns having similar or less infection and death rates per 100k people as those under lockdown.
|
|
|
Post by cplampman on Apr 5, 2020 13:26:06 GMT -5
Another sign for good news is that today Governor Cuomo announced that New York, the epicenter of the virus in the U.S. will peak in the next 4-8, before the April 16th average. Several bright spots. NYC might peak in 4-8 which is, I think, what his barometer has been, but just from what I've been observing it might be a little longer on my side of the state. I went to get essentials yesterday and a family of 3 with a toddler were shopping together. Even though the cases in Erie county were skyrocketing, and small towns were getting positive tests (mine included: pop. 5000) some people still aren't respecting the severity. So on a state level I'd expect it to be at the high end of that prediction, or longer. Agreed. I live in North Buffalo and it just amazes me how it just seems like business as usual everywhere. I feel like the only “non essential” businesses here are barbers and restaurants. Stay safe out there though and hope all is well for you and your family!
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Apr 5, 2020 13:34:21 GMT -5
Basically what I am gathering here is that optimism and positive futures go out the window, huh? I am not taking this situation any less seriously than most; in fact I have been hinging on the side of most cautious. I am not seeing my older relatives and am only leaving my house once a week for groceries, but let's try to be positive here and look at the numbers of Corona as a stand alone case and not past trends of other pandemics. I double majored in both accounting and economics with a minor in finance. Analysing trends of numbers and projecting bell curves from a sample of data is my forte. I am not saying to lose vigilance in this situation, in fact these next two weeks are the most testing thus far, but in 5-6 weeks you all will probably be pleasantly surprised how much progress has been made. Early in this pandemic, there were reports that some people who had recovered also suffered 20-30% loss of function in their lungs. That is an irreversible situation. Since those early reports, I have been unable to find any further data or information. Maybe you could find some? I'm highly interested in this if you can. This is an impossible thing to get a true projection on because of the human element. Not everyone are adhering to the same ideas. Hell, you got jackasses on Fox News telling the general public it isn't a big deal. This is the nonsense what will make this pandemic last longer and kill more people than it should. I also have a concern that once the curve starts to flatten, people will start getting lax about the guide lines. You can run numbers all day but you'll never be able to account for the human element because humans are unpredictable based on what influences them.
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 5, 2020 13:36:39 GMT -5
Once again, the "doomsday" scenarios were with NO lockdowns. The numbers are more than you said they were going to be in that previous thread. I'd also argue that those are also not true... that can be seen as evidenced by states with no lockdowns having similar or less infection and death rates per 100k people as those under lockdown. Did you just go back to using "rates" when you were one of the main critics of that? I'm saying you said there would be very few deaths WITHOUT any lockdowns or distancing. Unless I'm remembering wrong? The numbers WITH that stuff in place are MORE than you said they'd be WITHOUT?! USA is a tough case study anyway; huge country, with different policies in different states. Certain states may have got "lucky" due to fewer vectors traveling there from outside the country or state. I was actually talking with the UK in mind, but I stand by my point for any country. You REALLY played it down at first. Putting any kind "rates" to one side, I'm sure you said there would be very few deaths. (And again, that was with no lockdown or distancing policies...)
|
|
|
Post by catcherman22 on Apr 5, 2020 15:16:01 GMT -5
I'd also argue that those are also not true... that can be seen as evidenced by states with no lockdowns having similar or less infection and death rates per 100k people as those under lockdown. Did you just go back to using "rates" when you were one of the main critics of that? I'm saying you said there would be very few deaths WITHOUT any lockdowns or distancing. Unless I'm remembering wrong? The numbers WITH that stuff in place are MORE than you said they'd be WITHOUT?! USA is a tough case study anyway; huge country, with different policies in different states. Certain states may have got "lucky" due to fewer vectors traveling there from outside the country or state. I was actually talking with the UK in mind, but I stand by my point for any country. You REALLY played it down at first. Putting any kind "rates" to one side, I'm sure you said there would be very few deaths. (And again, that was with no lockdown or distancing policies...) You remember incorrectly... I am pro rates, anti factors.... I didn't say there would be very few deaths.. I said the mortality would be similar to the flu. I'm the one who believes this is similar to the flu... with death rates being near identical, sans the elderly and those with compromised immune systems. The more you look into the numbers, the more this is coming into light.. They number of deaths in the US each week (from all causes.. not just covid) from Feb 1 to the week ending Friday is LESS than the average number of deaths from all causes over the last 4 years. www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/index.htm. It'll be interesting to watch the last two columns... pneumonia vs covid related pneumonia.. I think they should be closer together, especially since they are not counting flu related pneumonia in that number.. and the cdc says as much at the end of the report. That shows just how under tested Covid is... Flu data is a little slower in reaching... gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html... but roughly 15% of the pneumonia deaths are from the flu... Week ending 3/28, the number of covid related pneumonia deaths was about 15% as well. This is a number to watch moving forward as it's been progressing up as more people are tested. Also interesting is watching the number of pneumonia related deaths drop as the week's are progressing.
|
|
|
Post by SweetTeeBag on Apr 5, 2020 15:17:46 GMT -5
NYC might peak in 4-8 which is, I think, what his barometer has been, but just from what I've been observing it might be a little longer on my side of the state. I went to get essentials yesterday and a family of 3 with a toddler were shopping together. Even though the cases in Erie county were skyrocketing, and small towns were getting positive tests (mine included: pop. 5000) some people still aren't respecting the severity. So on a state level I'd expect it to be at the high end of that prediction, or longer. Agreed. I live in North Buffalo and it just amazes me how it just seems like business as usual everywhere. I feel like the only “non essential” businesses here are barbers and restaurants. Stay safe out there though and hope all is well for you and your family! I'm like 45 minutes south of you down in Arcade.
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 5, 2020 15:35:25 GMT -5
Did you just go back to using "rates" when you were one of the main critics of that? I'm saying you said there would be very few deaths WITHOUT any lockdowns or distancing. Unless I'm remembering wrong? The numbers WITH that stuff in place are MORE than you said they'd be WITHOUT?! USA is a tough case study anyway; huge country, with different policies in different states. Certain states may have got "lucky" due to fewer vectors traveling there from outside the country or state. I was actually talking with the UK in mind, but I stand by my point for any country. You REALLY played it down at first. Putting any kind "rates" to one side, I'm sure you said there would be very few deaths. (And again, that was with no lockdown or distancing policies...) You remember incorrectly... I am pro rates, anti factors.... I didn't say there would be very few deaths.. I said the mortality would be similar to the flu. I'm the one who believes this is similar to the flu... with death rates being near identical, sans the elderly and those with compromised immune systems. The more you look into the numbers, the more this is coming into light.. They number of deaths in the US each week (from all causes.. not just covid) from Feb 1 to the week ending Friday is LESS than the average number of deaths from all causes over the last 4 years. www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/index.htm. It'll be interesting to watch the last two columns... pneumonia vs covid related pneumonia.. I think they should be closer together, especially since they are not counting flu related pneumonia in that number.. and the cdc says as much at the end of the report. That shows just how under tested Covid is... Flu data is a little slower in reaching... gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html... but roughly 15% of the pneumonia deaths are from the flu... Week ending 3/28, the number of covid related pneumonia deaths was about 15% as well. This is a number to watch moving forward as it's been progressing up as more people are tested. Also interesting is watching the number of pneumonia related deaths drop as the week's are progressing. I remember you making light of it and saying it would be similar to flu, which you've done again here. I massively disagree with you. You first link comes with THREE paragraphs of explanations that say the data is not complete, especially for recent data. I thought I'd detected a change in tone in this thread, not just from you, from everyone, that meant whilst we may still disagree on what the final death toll will be, everyone had accepted this had gone way beyond flu and had caused a lot of additional deaths and a huge strain on services. I've obviously got this wrong in your case. I massively disagree with your outlook on it 👍
|
|
|
Post by golferdude1994 on Apr 5, 2020 15:40:05 GMT -5
Basically what I am gathering here is that optimism and positive futures go out the window, huh? I am not taking this situation any less seriously than most; in fact I have been hinging on the side of most cautious. I am not seeing my older relatives and am only leaving my house once a week for groceries, but let's try to be positive here and look at the numbers of Corona as a stand alone case and not past trends of other pandemics. I double majored in both accounting and economics with a minor in finance. Analysing trends of numbers and projecting bell curves from a sample of data is my forte. I am not saying to lose vigilance in this situation, in fact these next two weeks are the most testing thus far, but in 5-6 weeks you all will probably be pleasantly surprised how much progress has been made. Early in this pandemic, there were reports that some people who had recovered also suffered 20-30% loss of function in their lungs. That is an irreversible situation. Since those early reports, I have been unable to find any further data or information. Maybe you could find some? I'm highly interested in this if you can. This is an impossible thing to get a true projection on because of the human element. Not everyone are adhering to the same ideas. Hell, you got jackasses on Fox News telling the general public it isn't a big deal. This is the nonsense what will make this pandemic last longer and kill more people than it should. I also have a concern that once the curve starts to flatten, people will start getting lax about the guide lines. You can run numbers all day but you'll never be able to account for the human element because humans are unpredictable based on what influences them. Jimmy I have yet to see anything pertaining to lack of lung function recently. Alot of that was circling around initially when the pandemic first became prevalent so maybe this is no longer the case. I am not definitive either way though
|
|
|
Post by golferdude1994 on Apr 5, 2020 15:45:15 GMT -5
Did you just go back to using "rates" when you were one of the main critics of that? I'm saying you said there would be very few deaths WITHOUT any lockdowns or distancing. Unless I'm remembering wrong? The numbers WITH that stuff in place are MORE than you said they'd be WITHOUT?! USA is a tough case study anyway; huge country, with different policies in different states. Certain states may have got "lucky" due to fewer vectors traveling there from outside the country or state. I was actually talking with the UK in mind, but I stand by my point for any country. You REALLY played it down at first. Putting any kind "rates" to one side, I'm sure you said there would be very few deaths. (And again, that was with no lockdown or distancing policies...) You remember incorrectly... I am pro rates, anti factors.... I didn't say there would be very few deaths.. I said the mortality would be similar to the flu. I'm the one who believes this is similar to the flu... with death rates being near identical, sans the elderly and those with compromised immune systems. The more you look into the numbers, the more this is coming into light.. They number of deaths in the US each week (from all causes.. not just covid) from Feb 1 to the week ending Friday is LESS than the average number of deaths from all causes over the last 4 years. www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/index.htm. It'll be interesting to watch the last two columns... pneumonia vs covid related pneumonia.. I think they should be closer together, especially since they are not counting flu related pneumonia in that number.. and the cdc says as much at the end of the report. That shows just how under tested Covid is... Flu data is a little slower in reaching... gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html... but roughly 15% of the pneumonia deaths are from the flu... Week ending 3/28, the number of covid related pneumonia deaths was about 15% as well. This is a number to watch moving forward as it's been progressing up as more people are tested. Also interesting is watching the number of pneumonia related deaths drop as the week's are progressing. Yes Dan has always advocated for stats and numbers, it is very very interesting to me to see that deaths across the road are actually lower in the last two months compared to normal. These statistical anomalies are what I thrive on
|
|
|
Post by golferdude1994 on Apr 5, 2020 15:58:28 GMT -5
You remember incorrectly... I am pro rates, anti factors.... I didn't say there would be very few deaths.. I said the mortality would be similar to the flu. I'm the one who believes this is similar to the flu... with death rates being near identical, sans the elderly and those with compromised immune systems. The more you look into the numbers, the more this is coming into light.. They number of deaths in the US each week (from all causes.. not just covid) from Feb 1 to the week ending Friday is LESS than the average number of deaths from all causes over the last 4 years. www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/index.htm. It'll be interesting to watch the last two columns... pneumonia vs covid related pneumonia.. I think they should be closer together, especially since they are not counting flu related pneumonia in that number.. and the cdc says as much at the end of the report. That shows just how under tested Covid is... Flu data is a little slower in reaching... gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html... but roughly 15% of the pneumonia deaths are from the flu... Week ending 3/28, the number of covid related pneumonia deaths was about 15% as well. This is a number to watch moving forward as it's been progressing up as more people are tested. Also interesting is watching the number of pneumonia related deaths drop as the week's are progressing. Yes Dan has always advocated for stats and numbers, it is very very interesting to me to see that deaths across the road are actually lower in the last two months compared to normal. These statistical anomalies are what I thrive on I meant board not roads argh
|
|
|
Post by nevadaballin on Apr 5, 2020 19:31:50 GMT -5
Early in this pandemic, there were reports that some people who had recovered also suffered 20-30% loss of function in their lungs. That is an irreversible situation. Since those early reports, I have been unable to find any further data or information. Maybe you could find some? I'm highly interested in this if you can. This is an impossible thing to get a true projection on because of the human element. Not everyone are adhering to the same ideas. Hell, you got jackasses on Fox News telling the general public it isn't a big deal. This is the nonsense what will make this pandemic last longer and kill more people than it should. I also have a concern that once the curve starts to flatten, people will start getting lax about the guide lines. You can run numbers all day but you'll never be able to account for the human element because humans are unpredictable based on what influences them. Jimmy I have yet to see anything pertaining to lack of lung function recently. Alot of that was circling around initially when the pandemic first became prevalent so maybe this is no longer the case. I am not definitive either way though Yea, it is that silence about it since then that kind of freaks me out a little. At least some more info about those who did experience it would help.
|
|
|
Post by Riotous on Apr 5, 2020 23:47:38 GMT -5
Hi all I've only read the first page of this thread and this page, so if i repeat what others have said then forgive me. We can't predict the number of deaths or outcome of the virus because NO-ONE knows what it will be, so we have to deal in data that we are receiving and we have to hope that this data is the truth and is accurate. I find the below website easy to access and (hopefully) reputable... covid19.science.unimelb.edu.au/My advice for whats its worth would be to view your countries results/forecasts independently from other countries, for example... In Australia there are far less people than in the US and they are far more spread out, therefore the spread should affect less % of the population. That said the bell curve of new cases will (eventually) show on EVERY countries graph, you've just got to wait for the curve to start flattening and finally falling. We can look at the countries that were infected first, and you'd have to expect that all other countries will (in different lengths of time) follow the same path, China's graph (if you trust the numbers), South Koreas graph etc. There are other interesting stats on the page too - Time to double, expected cases in 10 days, detection rate. The scary bit is if there's a second wave and what happens once countries start to come out of isolation
|
|