Go Back  Bike Forums > The Lounge > Coronavirus/COVID-19
Reload this Page >

Fatality rates in CA

Notices
Coronavirus/COVID-19 Discussion of the novel coronavirus

Fatality rates in CA

Old 06-22-20, 06:26 PM
  #101  
3alarmer
Friendship is Magic
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,911

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18619 Post(s)
Liked 2,141 Times in 1,573 Posts
Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post

The best window into this are special cases where we are able to test complete, controlled populations, like in prisons, and on cruise ships.

The Diamond Princess had 3711 total passengers+crew, 712 of them tested infected (331 without symptoms), and 13 died.

That's a perfectly known fatality rate for the population on that ship of 13/712 = 1.826%, That fatality rate would be different than the overall fatality rate for the general public, based on how different the demographics are on the cruise ship. Unless this was some special kind of booze cruise, this demographic probably tilts old. So if you're too old/sick to go on cruises, you're probably looking at a higher risk than 1.826%. If you're younger/stronger than the average cruise ship customer, you're probably looking at a lower risk.

In Lompoc, over 1000 prisoners tested positive. Searching Google, it seems that 4 of those prisoners died, the 4th death reported Jun 1. Since it's been 3 weeks since then, I presume the deaths are done and all other infected prisoners recovered. For that contained case, 4/1000 is 0.4%. Prisoner demographics are maybe younger(?) and stronger(?) than the general public, so I would expect the general public overall fatality rate to be larger than 0.4%.
...why would you assume this ? Is your interest in this science or speculation ? Prisons and cruise ships have no resemblance to the world in which we live. Nor are they especially representative of the population at large. As you then go on to state.


How in the world does any of that speculation help in either combating the pandemic, or even in understanding it, given the significant numbers of people who continue to die here in the Unites States ?


Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but you appear to have an interest in playing with the numbers to minimize the fatality probabilities. Which in turn appears to be a political interpretation of this pandemic, rather than one driven by any sense of what will happen to those numbers if and when we start to overwhelm hospital resources again. Which appears to be the direction Arizona is quickly headed, and Florida is kinda hot on their heels.
3alarmer is offline  
Likes For 3alarmer:
Old 06-22-20, 06:53 PM
  #102  
skookum
cyclotourist
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: calgary, canada
Posts: 1,179
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 320 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times in 72 Posts
I'm still not sure what you guys are arguing about.

A back of the envelope IFR is 1%.

That fits right between the estimates Ruberad made for Lompoc prison and Diamond Princess. Agreed that neither of the those two populations are perfectly representative of society in general, but the denominator in each case is known, so they are reasonable estimates.
We estimate that infection fatality rate (IFR) for COVID-19 in the US through the end of April is between 0.9-1.2%. This matches a May 7 study that estimates the IFR to be slightly less than 1.3% after accounting for asymptomatic cases. We also found that most countries in Europe (with the the exceptions of United Kingdom, Spain, and Eastern Europe) have an IFR closer to 0.75%, which matches this May 6 study.

Due to the reasons above, we use the following initial IFR in our projections:
  • 0.75% IFR: Japan, South Korea, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, all EU countries except Spain
  • 1% IFR: US and all other countries
Since June 1, 2020, we use a variable IFR that decreases over time to reflect improving treatments and the lower proportion of care home deaths. Hence, we decrease the initial IFR linearly over the span of 3 months until it is 50% of the original IFR. So for example, by August 2020, we estimate the IFR to be ~0.5% in the US and ~0.4% in most of Western Europe.

Recent global, Europe, and US studies point to a 0.5-1% IFR to be a reasonable estimate. One of the largest antibody studies thus far estimated a 1.2% IFR for Spain.
This is from the explanatory notes of https://covid19-projections.com/ ,a pandemic modelling project. They quote several sources that indicate slightly less than 1%, it seems like a reasonable figure.
I'm not sure about their assumptions that the rate will decrease, that might be a bit optimistic. I'm not promoting them as being any better at modelling than any others, I just ran across their summary for IFR and I thought I would share it.

Okay, back to the battle.
skookum is offline  
Likes For skookum:
Old 06-22-20, 08:38 PM
  #103  
3alarmer
Friendship is Magic
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,911

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18619 Post(s)
Liked 2,141 Times in 1,573 Posts
Originally Posted by skookum View Post
I'm still not sure what you guys are arguing about.
...

Okay, back to the battle.
...we do not argue here, sir. I can assure you we discuss, as is the habit of gentlemen. *harrumph*
3alarmer is offline  
Old 06-22-20, 08:45 PM
  #104  
3alarmer
Friendship is Magic
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,911

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18619 Post(s)
Liked 2,141 Times in 1,573 Posts
Originally Posted by skookum View Post

A back of the envelope IFR is 1%.

.
3alarmer is offline  
Likes For 3alarmer:
Old 06-22-20, 10:05 PM
  #105  
RubeRad
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 9,256

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Moto Fantom29 ProSL hardtail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times in 509 Posts
Originally Posted by wgscott View Post
Also, is there any reason to trust the Bureau of Prisons more than you do the Chinese Government?
I would place different levels of apriori trust in a for-profit prison vs a direct government bureaucracy prison, but both I would trust more than the Chinese govt
RubeRad is offline  
Old 06-22-20, 10:13 PM
  #106  
wgscott
Occam's Rotor
 
wgscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 6,275
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 1,362 Times in 704 Posts
In terms of actual confirmed cases and deaths, we have today:

• 184,374 cases in California, including 5,559 deaths. (3.0%)

• 20,176 in the Bay Area, including 537 deaths. (2.7%)

• More than 2.2 million in the U.S., including 119,935 deaths. (5.5%)
wgscott is offline  
Old 06-22-20, 10:24 PM
  #107  
RubeRad
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 9,256

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Moto Fantom29 ProSL hardtail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times in 509 Posts
Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
...why would you assume this ?
Which?

Is your interest in this science or speculation ?
Science, but with imperfect data, science involves some amount of speculation, with transparency about why speculations are speculated, and how they might be wrong.


Prisons and cruise ships have no resemblance to the world in which we live. Nor are they especially representative of the population at large. As you then go on to state.
They have some resemblance, so we can try to apply information to populations that are similar, and adjust information when it is understood how populations differ.

How in the world does any of that speculation help in either combating the pandemic, or even in understanding it, given the significant numbers of people who continue to die here in the Unites States ?
Getting the best understanding we can of the nature/behavior of the virus from the incomplete data we have available is the best we can do. Ignoring data because it is imperfect is not the best we can do.

Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but you appear to have an interest in playing with the numbers to minimize the fatality probabilities.
Is my one-sided desire to minimize the fatality probabilities why I bounded the fatality rate as greater than 0.4%?

I'm just tryin to get a bead on accurate statistics, man. As you and I both have stated above, it is of almost no use to try to give One fatality % for the whole population. A much clearer picture emerges when we look at how the fatality % differs for different groups of people.


Which in turn appears to be a political interpretation of this pandemic, rather than one driven by any sense of what will happen to those numbers if and when we start to overwhelm hospital resources again. Which appears to be the direction Arizona is quickly headed, and Florida is kinda hot on their heels.
Well based on per-capita cases/deaths, CA is doing basically the best of any highly-populated state. Which means we're doing the best job of social distancing and testing. But it also probably means that the state govt has chosen to strike a balance between statewide biological health and economic health, closer to the biological health end of the spectrum. Maybe our economy is suffering more than AZ/FL, I don't know.

Personally, selfishly, It's easy enough for me to stay in full lockdown for 9 more months. I have a secure (for now) information-sector job that I can telecommute 100%. I can survive in lockdown just fine indefinitely, telecommuting and going to the grocery store, and saving money from not buying gas.

It's not that easy for people that work with their hands.

Then again, are S. Korea and Japan and Taiwan suffering the most extreme economic hardship as the inevitable cost of doing so well biologically? I have no idea, but I bet they are economically in a similar boat to us, or maybe better, meaning they're win-win compared to us, and we're doing worse on both fronts.
RubeRad is offline  
Old 06-22-20, 10:43 PM
  #108  
79pmooney
A Roadie Forever
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,657

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Mentioned: 100 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2392 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 834 Times in 562 Posts
Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post
....



Well based on per-capita cases/deaths, CA is doing basically the best of any highly-populated state. Which means we're doing the best job of social distancing and testing. But it also probably means that the state govt has chosen to strike a balance between statewide biological health and economic health, closer to the biological health end of the spectrum. Maybe our economy is suffering more than AZ/FL, I don't know.

...
I read an interesting article a couple of months ago on the detailed study of how different cities fared in the years after the Spanish Flu of 1918. (Two cities that had very similar situations took very different approaches to shutdowns, etc and had very different outcomes, Minneapolis and St Paul.) The one thing that stood out strikingly is that the cities that shut down first, hardest and longest recovered best, both short term (the next several years) and long term (The next several decades and to this day). Minneapolis and St Paul went into that epidemic on fairly even terms. Minneapolis shut down early and hard. St Paul not until they had to and they reopened early. Minneapolis came out of their shutdown with far fewer deaths, debt and grew to far stronger to this day.

The real-time research has been done. But nobody wants to read it.
79pmooney is offline  
Likes For 79pmooney:
Old 06-22-20, 10:53 PM
  #109  
wgscott
Occam's Rotor
 
wgscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 6,275
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 1,362 Times in 704 Posts
21% fatality rate in a nursing home in Concord, CA.

About 50% of the state’s deaths from COVID-19 involve residents and workers at nursing homes and other residential care facilities for the elderly.

Last edited by wgscott; 06-22-20 at 11:02 PM.
wgscott is offline  
Old 06-22-20, 11:58 PM
  #110  
3alarmer
Friendship is Magic
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,911

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18619 Post(s)
Liked 2,141 Times in 1,573 Posts
Originally Posted by 79pmooney View Post
I read an interesting article a couple of months ago on the detailed study of how different cities fared in the years after the Spanish Flu of 1918. (Two cities that had very similar situations took very different approaches to shutdowns, etc and had very different outcomes, Minneapolis and St Paul.) The one thing that stood out strikingly is that the cities that shut down first, hardest and longest recovered best, both short term (the next several years) and long term (The next several decades and to this day). Minneapolis and St Paul went into that epidemic on fairly even terms. Minneapolis shut down early and hard. St Paul not until they had to and they reopened early. Minneapolis came out of their shutdown with far fewer deaths, debt and grew to far stronger to this day.

The real-time research has been done. But nobody wants to read it.
...I actually linked that study in the long running P+R "Great American Reopening" thread. I think maybe they shut down teh P+R, or maybe they just ejected me. Nobody was much interested in it when I cited it there either. Which is why I keep saying Santayana was right on the money.
3alarmer is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 12:23 AM
  #111  
3alarmer
Friendship is Magic
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,911

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18619 Post(s)
Liked 2,141 Times in 1,573 Posts
Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post


Science, but with imperfect data, science involves some amount of speculation, with transparency about why speculations are speculated, and how they might be wrong.
...I'm sorry, but that's not science. At least, it's not the science I got taught. That's something else...more akin to what happened at a Grateful Dead concert.




Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post
Getting the best understanding we can of the nature/behavior of the virus from the incomplete data we have available is the best we can do. Ignoring data because it is imperfect is not the best we can do.
...my feeling is that you are focusing on imperfect data when there are better measures, based on less ephemeral numbers.

Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post
Is my one-sided desire to minimize the fatality probabilities why I bounded the fatality rate as greater than 0.4%?
...like many numbers guys I have known over the years, I feel you have a tendency to focus in on them, while ignoring the actual experimental design/real world obectives.

Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post
I'm just tryin to get a bead on accurate statistics, man. As you and I both have stated above, it is of almost no use to try to give One fatality % for the whole population. A much clearer picture emerges when we look at how the fatality % differs for different groups of people.
...if you really believe this, you might try speculating on where the fatality rates go when some states/rural areas start overwhelming their hospital resources, as has already happened in NC, Italy, possibly Belgium (I haven't kept up with Belgium). Because what happens is that fatalities start rapidly increasing, CFR goes up accordingly, and slowing it down at that point is like trying to turn an aircraft carrier.



Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post
Well based on per-capita cases/deaths, CA is doing basically the best of any highly-populated state. Which means we're doing the best job of social distancing and testing. But it also probably means that the state govt has chosen to strike a balance between statewide biological health and economic health, closer to the biological health end of the spectrum. Maybe our economy is suffering more than AZ/FL, I don't know.
...Google up that flu pandemic of 1918 economics study mentioned above. What happened with those guys is that they had waves of infection, and by the time the second or third wave had run its course, the people in the areas where they had stayed open, or reopened to soon because of economic concerns, the population was so panicked and beaten down that they took substantially longer to recover economically. In some cases it lasted right on into the Depression of the 30's.

Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post
Personally, selfishly, It's easy enough for me to stay in full lockdown for 9 more months. I have a secure (for now) information-sector job that I can telecommute 100%. I can survive in lockdown just fine indefinitely, telecommuting and going to the grocery store, and saving money from not buying gas.

It's not that easy for people that work with their hands.
...I have at least as much at stake in economic recovery in California as do you. I just think you're wrong about the best longer term strategy to accomplish it. See above.

Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post
Then again, are S. Korea and Japan and Taiwan suffering the most extreme economic hardship as the inevitable cost of doing so well biologically? I have no idea, but I bet they are economically in a similar boat to us, or maybe better, meaning they're win-win compared to us, and we're doing worse on both fronts.
...all those countries have been much more aggressive in testing and tracing, and got started earlier. At this point it's apples to oranges unless we get serious about using the tools of epidemiology that are well established. As it stands right now, even here in California we're not up to the level of those countries. And as I stated before, our state borders are open to every other person who lives within the contiguous US, without any sort of screening for entry.
3alarmer is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 02:35 AM
  #112  
wgscott
Occam's Rotor
 
wgscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 6,275
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 1,362 Times in 704 Posts
If the fatality rates (which are remarkably consistent world-wide -- 2.5% to 5%) are being inflated due to lack of systematic, universal random testing of the population at large, remember that this also must be true of influenza fatality rates to which they are being compared.

How many people get the flu but never bother to be tested? I have never been tested. I know I had it in 1999. I may have had it many times since then, and dismissed it as a bad cold. All of the same objections can be raised against "inflated" flu fatality rates.

The Trump non-policy apologists obsess on the denominator, while de-emphasizing the numerator (i.e., the absolute death toll, which is a national disgrace at 120K and predicted to be 200K by the end of the summer).

When they still look quite bad, then they claim the official enemy must be lying. Because that is ideologically serviceable, it only requires proof by assertion. Anyone who asks for evidence is dismissed as a commie.

When we look at the number of people killed in concentration camps by the nazis, do we normalize it for the population of Europe, or for the number of people in the targeted groups?

Death rates are important in that they tell us who are the most vulnerable parts of our society. That information can be used to protect people, but instead it is being abused to dismiss the seriousness of the pandemic (and probably exploited by those who would be happy to see certain demographics exterminated by the virus).

Absolute numbers are critical because each body counts as an individual life prematurely terminated, often with great suffering and expense. The country-wide death-toll tells us how well we are functioning as a technologically advanced society with unparalleled wealth and resources. That number is a grotesque embarrassment and reflects the competency of those currently in charge. It is easy to see why they try to distract and discredit statistics that make their criminal complicity obvious to anyone who doesn't have his or her head in the sand.

There are lies. Damn lies. And statistics. And then their are lies concocted in service to the State.

Last edited by wgscott; 06-23-20 at 02:43 AM.
wgscott is offline  
Likes For wgscott:
Old 06-23-20, 07:25 AM
  #113  
skookum
cyclotourist
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: calgary, canada
Posts: 1,179
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 320 Post(s)
Liked 117 Times in 72 Posts
Alberta has a fatality rate of 2%, BC has a fatality rate of 6%. Population is about 4 million in Alberta, 5 million in BC, demographics are similar. Why the difference in neighbouring provinces?
skookum is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 08:38 AM
  #114  
3alarmer
Friendship is Magic
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,911

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18619 Post(s)
Liked 2,141 Times in 1,573 Posts
Originally Posted by wgscott View Post
If the fatality rates.....
......................^^^what he said^^^
3alarmer is offline  
Likes For 3alarmer:
Old 06-23-20, 08:40 AM
  #115  
3alarmer
Friendship is Magic
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,911

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18619 Post(s)
Liked 2,141 Times in 1,573 Posts
Originally Posted by skookum View Post
Alberta has a fatality rate of 2%, BC has a fatality rate of 6%. Population is about 4 million in Alberta, 5 million in BC, demographics are similar. Why the difference in neighbouring provinces?
...if I had to guess (and I hate guessing about stuff like this), I would guess that it's because we are still early in the process there. But it might be a problem with the numbers (reporting, etc.)
3alarmer is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 08:51 AM
  #116  
3alarmer
Friendship is Magic
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,911

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18619 Post(s)
Liked 2,141 Times in 1,573 Posts
A Longtime Liberal Opinion Columnist from Today's NY Times..

.
...it's difficult to see where she is wrong in this.
Graphs of the coronavirus curves in Britain, Canada, Germany and Italy look like mountains, with steep climbs up and then back down. The one for America shows a fast climb up to a plateau. For a while, the number of new cases in the U.S. was at least slowly declining. Now, according to The Times, it’s up a terrifying 22 percent over the last 14 days.

As Politico reported on Monday, Italy’s coronavirus catastrophe once looked to Americans like a worst-case scenario. Today, it said, “America’s new per capita cases remain on par with Italy’s worst day — and show signs of rising further.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/22/o...rus-trump.html
3alarmer is offline  
Likes For 3alarmer:
Old 06-23-20, 10:15 AM
  #117  
RubeRad
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 9,256

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Moto Fantom29 ProSL hardtail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times in 509 Posts
Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
.
...it's difficult to see where she is wrong in this.
I'm sure she's right.

But if she's gonna talk about graphs, show me the graphs! I'm a mathematician, I need numbers.

To be clear, I'm not syaing she's wrong or lying, I'm saying she's not doing the best job presenting her information if she's not at least linking to a page with the graphs she's talking about. (same for the linked Politico article)
RubeRad is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 10:34 AM
  #118  
RubeRad
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 9,256

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Moto Fantom29 ProSL hardtail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times in 509 Posts
Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
...I'm sorry, but that's not science. At least, it's not the science I got taught. That's something else...more akin to what happened at a Grateful Dead concert.
...my feeling is that you are focusing on imperfect data when there are better measures, based on less ephemeral numbers.
I am focusing on the best data I've found, which is the L.A. Times page of coronavirus statistics visualizations. If you have less ephemeral numbers from better measures, please, I welcome them! I thirst for them!

...like many numbers guys I have known over the years, I feel you have a tendency to focus in on them, while ignoring the actual experimental design/real world obectives.
'actual experimental design' is not quite appropriate to what's going on. This snit is happening to us, obviously way out of our control and we're just trying to get a handle on it. There is no experimental design.

...if you really believe this, you might try speculating on where the fatality rates go when some states/rural areas start overwhelming their hospital resources, as has already happened in NC, Italy, possibly Belgium (I haven't kept up with Belgium). Because what happens is that fatalities start rapidly increasing, CFR goes up accordingly, and slowing it down at that point is like trying to turn an aircraft carrier.
Fatality rates don't change. For various demographics of age/health/medical access/qualityetc, the kill rate is what it is. The infection rate depends on how we behave as a society, and for every infection, the coronavirus rolls its fatality dice -- it's got a whole bag of differently-loaded dice for different groups of people.

So it's critically important to understand the fatality rate(s), so we can know who exactly are the most vulnerable, and just how vulnerable they are, so we can devote more of our limited protection resources to them. If we're going to do a half-assed job of it (which obviously we are), let's at least get that one cheek on target.

...Google up that flu pandemic of 1918 economics study mentioned above. What happened with those guys is that they had waves of infection, and by the time the second or third wave had run its course, the people in the areas where they had stayed open, or reopened to soon because of economic concerns, the population was so panicked and beaten down that they took substantially longer to recover economically. In some cases it lasted right on into the Depression of the 30's.
Sigh. If I have time. Meanwhile I take on board your summary.

...I have at least as much at stake in economic recovery in California as do you. I just think you're wrong about the best longer term strategy to accomplish it.
I don't think I have ever advocated a strategy. I am awash in ignorance. Probably I have asked questions, and probably that appeared to you and everybody else as 'Concern Trolling' (just learned that term on the 2nd closed homophobia thread), trying NOT to explicitly advocate for a certain policy, wink, wink, nudge, nudge, say no more. But really, honestly, I'm just asking questions. I just like numbers. I can do numbers.


...all those countries have been much more aggressive in testing and tracing, and got started earlier. At this point it's apples to oranges unless we get serious about using the tools of epidemiology that are well established.
Which I'm pretty sure must include measuring fatality rates. Ideally widespread random sampling, but since we don't have the bandwidth, we have to make the best inferences we can from the statistics we have.

As it stands right now, even here in California we're not up to the level of those countries. And as I stated before, our state borders are open to every other person who lives within the contiguous US, without any sort of screening for entry.
That sounds like the kind of scaremongering that's anti-mail-ballots. Is there evidence that's a real problem? Presumably CA is getting better results than, say, AZ, because our policies are stricter. If anything, people would be going to AZ to 'be free'. I heard on a podcast one guy talking about how he took his family to Phoenix for a few days of vacation, so they could eat at restaurants, the wife could get her hair did, etc.

Last edited by RubeRad; 06-23-20 at 12:38 PM.
RubeRad is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 10:36 AM
  #119  
RubeRad
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 9,256

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Moto Fantom29 ProSL hardtail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times in 509 Posts
Originally Posted by wgscott View Post
21% fatality rate in a nursing home in Concord, CA.
That's right in line with the 80+ fatality rate in the OP of 23.6% statewide.
RubeRad is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 10:49 AM
  #120  
RubeRad
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 9,256

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Moto Fantom29 ProSL hardtail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times in 509 Posts
Originally Posted by skookum View Post
Alberta has a fatality rate of 2%, BC has a fatality rate of 6%. Population is about 4 million in Alberta, 5 million in BC, demographics are similar. Why the difference in neighbouring provinces?
It might be differently capable health services? Maybe Alberta's policies/social compliance are more effective at protecting the oldest, most vulnerable demographic? Would love to see more info.
RubeRad is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 10:56 AM
  #121  
RubeRad
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 9,256

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Moto Fantom29 ProSL hardtail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times in 509 Posts
Originally Posted by RubeRad View Post
I'm sure she's right.

But if she's gonna talk about graphs, show me the graphs! I'm a mathematician, I need numbers.

To be clear, I'm not syaing she's wrong or lying, I'm saying she's not doing the best job presenting her information if she's not at least linking to a page with the graphs she's talking about. (same for the linked Politico article)
Here are some graphs:




RubeRad is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 11:07 AM
  #122  
RubeRad
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 9,256

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Moto Fantom29 ProSL hardtail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times in 509 Posts
And those graphs tell exactly the story from the NYT thing. That uptick at the end of US Daily cases is not what I'd call 'gentle' or 'subtle', and it will be interesting to see if the steady decline in daily deaths will follow with a similar uptick. Given a 2-week lag, we would expect to see the daily death curve turn upwards any day now (and indeed the very tail end of that smoothed 7-day average gives the slightest hint of turning upwards)

The daily cases uptick would be caused by (at least) two factors: a rise in infections, and a rise in counted infections due to increased testing. Likely this uptick is caused by both.

If the daily death curve exactly mirrors the case uptick, then the case uptick is not at all due to increased testing, it's entirely due to increased infections, followed inevitably by fixed fatality rates of death.

If the daily death curve maintains its steady decline, then the case uptick is entirely due to increased testing.

Likely the reality that unfolds will be in the middle.

Another possible factor is, if protective measures are effective at offering more protection for the more vulnerable, then cases among the less vulnerable, low-fatality demographics could rise, without causing a spike in deaths.

Unfortunately, worldometer.info doesn't have per-country hospitalization/ICU usage statistics, so no information there about how health care capacity is coping.

Last edited by RubeRad; 06-23-20 at 11:14 AM.
RubeRad is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 11:13 AM
  #123  
RubeRad
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 9,256

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Moto Fantom29 ProSL hardtail

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 672 Times in 509 Posts
Also, for scale purposes, note that the US population is about 330M, Italy's is about 60M. So multiply the Italy vertical axes by 5 to compare head-to-head. Italy's peaks of 5k cases and 750 deaths/day, x5 become 25k cases and 3750 deaths/day, U.S. daily cases have been in that ballpark for 2 solid months. U.S. daily deaths never got up to 3750, peaking at a little over 2K, and declining since. Let's hope that's the only peak.
RubeRad is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 11:20 AM
  #124  
79pmooney
A Roadie Forever
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,657

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Mentioned: 100 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2392 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 834 Times in 562 Posts
Originally Posted by 3alarmer View Post
...I actually linked that study in the long running P+R "Great American Reopening" thread. I think maybe they shut down the P+R, or maybe they just ejected me. Nobody was much interested in it when I cited it there either. Which is why I keep saying Santayana was right on the money.
It was probably your link I follower. (I could never be a research type. I cannot both document where I got the info and absorb what I read when I open it.)

My comment again on our "mountain" vs the "mountains" of Europe and elsewhere. We are very successfully "flattening the curve", but ... we all know from our cycling that if we wait to flatten the curve until we've hit Skyline Blvd, we will spend the rest of our day riding the ridge line high above the city, never getting the glorious descent or seeing our loved ones. (In surfer's terms - to avoid the terrifying second wave - ride the wave you're on all the way to the beach. We're doing our best.)

On the personal side - I have a housemate who will not make it if I bring this home. I've resigned myself to the fact that I may have to live a very sheltered life for the indefinite future. Financially I'm comfortable so that isn't an issue. (And my old daily expenses - the espresso I love, gas, the occasional meal out have all gone to zero. Sadly so has my Sunday nights playing the blues at a jam, tipping the waitress and host band well and eating a little. It's a bar but I don't drink. Miss the other musicians, the folk I sit with, the dancers I get to play for.)

Went to a retail store yesterday (by appointment) and got temperature scanned on entry; my first. (98.4 - completely normal for me.)

Ben
79pmooney is offline  
Old 06-23-20, 12:23 PM
  #125  
3alarmer
Friendship is Magic
 
3alarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Tomato
Posts: 18,911

Bikes: old ones

Mentioned: 259 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18619 Post(s)
Liked 2,141 Times in 1,573 Posts
3alarmer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.