Coronavirus

[winfield100]

There are 18 M people in NYC, plus a ton in Jersey that all got washed in CV for a month and infected what.....20-40% of the population? 15k of them are going to die.

Extrapolate that out and tell me how we possibly get to 2.2M nationwide. It's mathematically embarrassing we're still talking about it.

@TheTalkingMule
Perhaps a visual aid

 

[SageBrush]

happened over Easter, in defiance of that state's law prohibiting gatherings of more than 10 people.

No group size restriction for churches

 

[Alfred]

I'm thinking of the recent German paper that reported 15% of a population testing positive for antibodies (using an accurate test!) and used that to calculate an IFR of 0.37%. I haven't seen an explanation of their methodology though. Hopefully there will be some studies soon from the US. I just hope they don't make stupid mistakes like assuming that all people currently infected will survive, using inaccurate tests, or choosing unrepresentative samples.

At the press conference the figure mentioned (with caveats) was indeed 15% , using one (unspecified) method. During the following discussions Streek also mentioned 20% - if analised via some other method. He also said that the the laboratory processes used to look for antibodies were rather laborious and there was still a lot of work ahead of them.

 

[Norbert]

I'm thinking of the recent German paper that reported 15% of a population testing positive for antibodies (using an accurate test!) and used that to calculate an IFR of 0.37%. I haven't seen an explanation of their methodology though. Hopefully there will be some studies soon from the US. I just hope they don't make stupid mistakes like assuming that all people currently infected will survive, using inaccurate tests, or choosing unrepresentative samples.

A preliminary result, for which links have gone dead, doesn't count as a serious challenge.

Also, the results are from a tiny town where Doggydogworld calculated that the fatality rates given correspond to just 7 deaths. That's not a valid basis for a statistic to be generalized.

Also some video suggested that the sample number given was 1,000, but only half of them processed for the results. That again doesn't speak well for the preliminary study, or for it being a serious challenge even when and if finished.

We didn't have an opportunity yet to carefully look at the numbers and what they mean. It all doesn't pass the smell test. At least not yet.

 

[Unpilot]

No group size restriction for churches

Yep that makes sense/S

 

[ZachF]

We don't have any numbers, no one is testing. Everything is an assumption.

NY stands at 10.5k, NYC at 7.3k. I doubt well see NYC double from here by the end of May. Perhaps this calendar year if this goes poorly in wave 2.

If corona has a ~0.37% IFR like the Iceland and German studies seem to suggest, with ~7,300 dead that means that 2-3 weeks ago ~2 million people in NYC already had Coronavirus... That's 1/4 of NYC. By now it could nearly be half of the city that has or had it.

 

[ZachF]

I'm guessing a slow staged process. You missed the the other ingredient which is contact tracing. Even if you get the numbers low enough, you still have to go back and quarantine people who were in contact with the remaining people. Otherwise your numbers start ballooning up.

And they have to come up with a robust system to actually do all this work with testing and contact tracing.

The states are probably switching gears towards reopening because they got fresh sobering financial data from their treasury depts... like "We are going to go bankrupt and have to fire half of the state's employees"

 

[dfwatt]

There are 18 M people in NYC, plus a ton in Jersey that all got washed in CV for a month and infected what.....20-40% of the population? 15k of them are going to die.

Extrapolate that out and tell me how we possibly get to 2.2M nationwide. It's mathematically embarrassing we're still talking about it.

Seems pretty obvious at this point that you just simply make s*** up. These are not just optimistic numbers, they're made up numbers. Especially the quasi-delusional idea that 20 to 40% of the population in New York and New Jersey have been infected. Just curious . . . Where do you get this stuff?

 

[HG Wells]

The states are probably switching gears towards reopening because they got fresh sobering financial data from their treasury depts... like "We are going to go bankrupt and have to fire half of the state's employees"

Well, that could be fixed by bringing back the ability of states and counties to print their own money./S

 

[TheTalkingMule]

This happened in hard hit NYC: Coronavirus News: 21 teachers among 50 NYC education employees dead of coronavirus.

How many teachers are there in NYC, 100k? They're about the most likely to have been repeatedly exposed to coronavirus. That's a mortality rate less than .05% if half of them were infected.

What's the age group for these deaths? Again, we seem to prefer a distinct lack of statistical clarity and a high dose of hysteria.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Seems pretty obvious at this point that you just simply make s*** up. These are not just optimistic numbers, they're made up numbers. Especially the quasi-delusional idea that 20 to 40% of the population in New York and New Jersey have been infected. Just curious . . . Where do you get this stuff?

Logic? Reading about the likelihood of spread?

 

[jerry33]

Time to set up a little soap tray in your garage... stomp in soap mixture for 1 minute before moving to a drying towel/rug, then onward to the house.

You can just do it the way the Japanese do. Shoes are for outside only, slippers (or indoor only shoes) are for inside. Much easier.

 

[EinSV]

UW model, just updated, shows 68.8k expected dead

Nevada's est went up from I believe 245 to now 272.

They also moved their expected peak deaths (2150) from 4/10 to 4/13. Peak resource use predicted for 4/10. IHME | COVID-19 Projections

4/10 is currently the peak for US deaths per worldometer:

4/10: 2035
4/11: 1830
4/12: 1528
4/13: 1535

 

[Norbert]

At the press conference the figure mentioned (with caveats) was indeed 15% , using one (unspecified) method. During the following discussions Streek also mentioned 20% - if analised via some other method. He also said that the the laboratory processes used to look for antibodies were rather laborious and there was still a lot of work ahead of them.

As far as I understand the preliminary number was for a sample of 500 in the small german city Gangelt which was an epicenter of the outbreak, and it was said that this number is _not_ representative for the whole of Germany.

 

[SageBrush]

ECDC data through Apr 13

Good news in Switzerland
The rest are ~ Meh
These graphs do not include the all important SAH context

 

[EinSV]

This seems like a very sensible rule. Hopefully it will be adopted state-wide.

Just a local update here - Sonoma County has adopted a mandatory mask in public places order as of April 17th. Basically, any indoor place except your own home, and any outdoor space where you cannot maintain 6' separation.

If anyone cares about the details, they're here.

 

[dfwatt]

Logic? Reading about the likelihood of spread?

I think that's talking mule code for wild extrapolation from an nitial data point. An R subscript of even 3+ doesn't mean that 40% of New York has been exposed/ infected. There is absolutely zero shred of biologic or epidemiologic evidence that anything like that has happened.

 

[SageBrush]

I think that's talking mule code for wild extrapolation from an nitial data point. An R subscript of even 3+ doesn't mean that 40% of New York has been exposed/ infected. There is absolutely zero shred of biologic or epidemiologic evidence that anything like that has happened.

An earlier post mentioned a NEJM letter that reported on universal testing by PCR and ELISA of OB admissions to an upscale (?) NYC hospital for labor. 15% were found to have evidence of exposure. I take that as a fair upper bound for NYC prevalence at the time of testing, but those women have been highly exposed due to frequent medical care visits, so I suspect they are an over-represented sample.

 

[dfwatt]

As far as I understand the preliminary number was for a sample of 500 in the small german city Gangelt which was an epicenter of the outbreak, and it was said that this number is _not_ representative for the whole of Germany.

It's believable that several really really hot hot spots in Europe particularly Italy but also Germany saw something on the order of 15% exposure. Indeed we have to assume I believe that Italy has many more cases than their actual case number in order to get to their death toll. It's possible that a high percentage of folks smoking also bumps that up and there's some evidence that overuse of antibiotics in Italy may contribute as well but still even with those shadings so to speak, I think you have to believe that Italy has the highest level of exposure along with Spain perhaps. But that's still an enormous distance from any version of 70%. So you have to say that even the places with the greatest penetration of covid-19 have a long way to go to get to any concept of herd immunity.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

I think that's talking mule code for wild extrapolation from an nitial data point. An R subscript of even 3+ doesn't mean that 40% of New York has been exposed/ infected. There is absolutely zero shred of biologic or epidemiologic evidence that anything like that has happened.

Something like 2,500 uniformed police have tested positive. Another 2k are out sick. Not sure how many cops have been tested in total, but that's one of the only well-tested groups in NYC and it indicates a massive infection rate.