Covid-19

[Zarathustra]

I would be horrified if 100,000,000 Americans died from this virus. Would my position regarding the sanctity of our basic liberties be different then? I don't know, and I won't have to know at this point, because COVID-19 was never going to be that bad.

You don't have to know . . . because you know? You are using numbers that have been limited by the quarantine/social distancing, and claiming this proves that it was "never going to be that bad."

What secret source of knowledge do you alone have that the entire medical community of 100s of countries aren't privy to?

The unemployed will soon be employed again. Including those in the medical community. [You were equally, deafeningly silent on the article I posted about deaths are probably twice as high as being reported, especially in places like Italy where the sick can't get to hospitals and they are dying alone in their homes.]

Forcing businesses to close as opposed to voluntary customer restrictions? Not acceptable.

I tend to agree. I think that voluntary restrictions were working. But those were still hurting the economy.

Being fined and/or arrested for not wearing a mask in public? Not acceptable.

Really? Do you accept seat belt laws? The government enforces safety standards all over the place. Wearing a mask is a minor, temporary nuisance. And it's certainly not universal, only in severely affected areas.

Handing out money to all citizens because you closed their businesses and/or put them out of a job? Not acceptable.

WTF? The government takes action that hurts people's paycheck, and then makes amends by handing out money, and you have a problem with this? Why?? It's emergency stimulus. What principle did this arise from?

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

I would be horrified if 100,000,000 Americans died from this virus. Would my position regarding the sanctity of our basic liberties be different then? I don't know, and I won't have to know at this point, because COVID-19 was never going to be that bad.

You don't have to know . . . because you know? You are using numbers that have been limited by the quarantine/social distancing, and claiming this proves that it was "never going to be that bad."

Again, you're misstating my position to gain traction for yours. I've agreed with social distancing since the beginning of this, what I've disagreed with is the government mandates that have shuttered businesses and put people out of work.

And yes, I know (and have known) that this wasn't going to be that bad. I've seen the panic from dozens of potential apocalypses over the course of the past several decades. Once the numbers started coming in it was pretty clear that this wasn't going to be a mass die-off.

The unemployed will soon be employed again. Including those in the medical community.

And you know this.....because you know?

Some might, but what about all the businesses that have already gone out of business? You're making several illogical leaps, this is one of the most egregious.

[You were equally, deafeningly silent on the article I posted about deaths are probably twice as high as being reported, especially in places like Italy where the sick can't get to hospitals and they are dying alone in their homes.]

I've posted at least one or two articles making that point, one as recently as this morning. Perhaps you should start reading the links I post.

[Zarathustra]

I notice the deafening silence regarding the links I posted yesterday regarding the layoffs in the medical community thanks to our overreaction to this virus.

From one of your links:

Orr joins thousands of health care workers across the nation who have been laid off, furloughed or are working reduced hours as their services are deemed nonessential and patients skip routine visits during an outbreak of COVID-19 cases, based on reporting from advocacy groups and from news stories from across the nation.

That's a free market response, patients skipping routine visits. Not government action. Are those people overreacting by choosing to put off routine visits to the doctor? I don't think it's your call to say. That's up to each individual.

Orr was a receptionist, btw, not a "health care worker." The article is deceptive and sensationalist.

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

I notice the deafening silence regarding the links I posted yesterday regarding the layoffs in the medical community thanks to our overreaction to this virus.

From one of your links:

Orr joins thousands of health care workers across the nation who have been laid off, furloughed or are working reduced hours as their services are deemed nonessential and patients skip routine visits during an outbreak of COVID-19 cases, based on reporting from advocacy groups and from news stories from across the nation.

That's a free market response, patients skipping routine visits. Not government action. Are those people overreacting by choosing to put off routine visits to the doctor? I don't think it's your call to say. That's up to each individual.

Orr was a receptionist, btw, not a "health care worker." The article is deceptive and sensationalist.

Zara, I have to ask if you're following the news. Pretty much every state has, as a matter of course, cancelled all elective healthcare. Including yours.

One person who was interviewed worked as a receptionist in the health care field, so you've decided the whole article is deceptive.

[SoulBiter]

Deaths in the US are now at 2000 per day. I dont know that this is the peak number of deaths or how long that will go. But if it is as it was in other countries, the death rate will not decline until well after the decline of new cases. In 30 days that's 60K deaths (assuming no uptick or downtick) 60K.

60K deaths in 30 days is way different than 60K deaths in a full year. Again time will tell what the number is. At this time we dont know. We are all just making projections.

CYDY has now tried its drug Leronlimab on some of the most critically ill and 8 out of 10 are coming off of ventilators. They have now sent their scientific data to the FDA and asked for the FDA for emergency use approval.

I say that to point out that this company and others like it have found therapy's to lessen the amount of deaths. So we may see that curve happen sooner rather than later. This happened at light speed comparative to pre-covid19. However if we had not given time for these companies to get these therapies going, I believe it would be much much worse.

[Zarathustra]

Again, you're misstating my position to gain traction for yours.

I haven't misstated your position at all. You've touted lowered numbers as proof that this was "never going to be that bad," when those numbers are lower because of the widespread quarantine. Without those, it would have been much worse (obviously).

And yes, I know (and have known) that this wasn't going to be that bad. I've seen the panic from dozens of potential apocalypses over the course of the past several decades. Once the numbers started coming in it was pretty clear that this wasn't going to be a mass die-off.

But that's because once the numbers started coming in, we altered our behavior and society--on a global scale--dramatically.

The unemployed will soon be employed again. Including those in the medical community.

And you know this.....because you know?

It's the business cycle. The economy always recovers. Recession and even depression are always temporary.

Some might, but what about all the businesses that have already gone out of business? You're making several illogical leaps, this is one of the most egregious.

Some businesses will always go out of business even in the best of times. You're able to dismiss deaths as, "People are always going to die from one thing or another, so why panic about this particular cause of death?" Well, why is business any different in that regard? There was no guarantee those businesses would have thrived indefinitely. If you guys can say, "No one gets upset about all the other deaths," I can say, "you guys don't get upset about the 1000s of businesses that go under each year." Shit happens.

[You were equally, deafeningly silent on the article I posted about deaths are probably twice as high as being reported, especially in places like Italy where the sick can't get to hospitals and they are dying alone in their homes.]

I've posted at least one or two articles making that point, one as recently as this morning. Perhaps you should start reading the links I post.

You've posted an article that made the opposite point, namely, that the death rate is probably much lower than we think--not the same point I just made.

And I've read one of your links. I thought it was anecdotal crap (see above). I'm not saying that health care workers aren't being laid off. But your evidence for such a claim seems to be little more than a sensational headline.

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

Again, you're misstating my position to gain traction for yours.

I haven't misstated your position at all. You've touted lowered numbers as proof that this was "never going to be that bad," when those numbers are lower because of the widespread quarantine. Without those, it would have been much worse (obviously).

I'm 100% certain that I'm more familiar with my position than you are. You are assuming facts not in evidence, as (obviously) one of the reasons the numbers are lower is that the virus is not as bad as it was initially thought.

And yes, I know (and have known) that this wasn't going to be that bad. I've seen the panic from dozens of potential apocalypses over the course of the past several decades. Once the numbers started coming in it was pretty clear that this wasn't going to be a mass die-off.

But that's because once the numbers started coming in, we altered our behavior and society--on a global scale--dramatically.

True, but that doesn't mean anything regarding the lethality of the bug. This is not a binary choice.

The unemployed will soon be employed again. Including those in the medical community.

And you know this.....because you know?

It's the business cycle. The economy always recovers. Recession and even depression are always temporary.

Again, you're assuming facts not in evidence. I sincerely hope you're right, but with no end in sight for these unnecessary policies, that remains to be seen. Additionally, it will be very interesting to see how many businesses that do stay afloat streamline their business model(s) to run leaner. For example, due to the newly-discovered (but obvious) ability for many people to work remotely, will the commercial real estate market crash? Who knows?

Some might, but what about all the businesses that have already gone out of business? You're making several illogical leaps, this is one of the most egregious.

Some businesses will always go out of business even in the best of times. You're able to dismiss deaths as, "People are always going to die from one thing or another, so why panic about this particular cause of death?" Well, why is business any different in that regard? There was no guarantee those businesses would have thrived indefinitely. If you guys can say, "No one gets upset about all the other deaths," I can say, "you guys don't get upset about the 1000s of businesses that go under each year." Shit happens.

Indeed. Except that we've yet to see deaths anywhere near the predictions, while 16+ million people just lost their jobs due to an unnecessary reaction.

[You were equally, deafeningly silent on the article I posted about deaths are probably twice as high as being reported, especially in places like Italy where the sick can't get to hospitals and they are dying alone in their homes.]

I've posted at least one or two articles making that point, one as recently as this morning. Perhaps you should start reading the links I post.

You've posted an article that made the opposite point, namely, that the death rate is probably much lower than we think--not the same point I just made.

Thank you for making it painfully obvious that you didn't read the link. From that BBC article:

While over-counting deaths among recorded Covid-19 cases may lead to overestimation of the death rate, there is another factor that could mean the death rate is also - confusingly - being underestimated at the same time.

This is the problem of hidden deaths from Covid-19: those people who die from the disease who are never tested. This comes into play when health services are overwhelmed and even those patients who have severe symptoms of the virus are not taken into hospital to be tested and treated, simply because there isn't capacity.

In the small Italian town of Nembro, in Lombardy, only 31 people have officially died from Covid-19. But one preliminary study has found that it's likely that far more people have died from Covid-19. That's because the overall death rate - not just from Covid-19, but from all causes - was four times higher this year than in the same period last year. Ordinarily, around 35 people die in the first months of the year in Nembro. This year, 158 people were registered to have died.

This jump in excess deaths is speculated to be down to undiagnosed and untested cases of Covid-19.

And I've read one of your links. I thought it was anecdotal crap (see above). I'm not saying that health care workers aren't being laid off. But your evidence for such a claim seems to be little more than a sensational.

Because you're not reading the links and making it clear that maintaining your position is more important than reality.

Here's yet another. Link

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Looking back at predictions made - which I am happy to do, including my own - Hashi stated on 3rd April that he expected to see a continuing rise in US cases of infection for the next 12 days, then plateauing over the next 5, then starting to fall by April 20th.

So what's your best guess Hashi? How many more days before we move out of this nigh on linear rise phase and start nearing the narrow crest of the bellcurve?

12 days, then 5 more days to move past the peak.

He wouldn't give any hard numbers on this, so I did for him, predicting back then that there'd be about 750k of identified COVID-19 infections within the US at the end of those 12 days, so by April 15th.

You specifically asked me for a number of days, not a number of deaths. I answered the question as it was asked.

Handing out money to all citizens because you closed their businesses and/or put them out of a job? Not acceptable.

WTF? The government takes action that hurts people's paycheck, and then makes amends by handing out money, and you have a problem with this? Why?? It's emergency stimulus. What principle did this arise from?

The government should not have taken the action that it took to force businesses to close in the first place. Businesses could have limited customers in the store, had special extended hours for people in high-risk groups, etc. Instead, they spiked business closures and unemployment numbers never before seen in the recorded history of the world over a disease which not even directly effected 0.03% of the global population ((total current cases + deaths + recovered cases)/(global population)).

[TheFallen]

Again, everyone's getting hung up on death numbers and mortality rates.

Guys.... these are irrelevant at the moment. Pretty much utterly and entirely irrelevant.

And that's true, even without taking into account that BBC article which points out - quite correctly IMV - that coronavirus death numbers may well be simultaneously being overcounted and undercounted, depending on the body reporting.

The only numbers that are worth watching are the number - and especially the ongoing rate of change in that number - of newly identified COVID-19 infections, and the later subset of that, the number of identified cases requiring hospitalisation.

Because that's what the objective of the imposed social distancing measures is all about - suppressing the R0 number of the infection, keeping the infection growth rate down and reducing required hospitalisations.

Succeeding in doing that will of course eventually result in less deaths - but that shift in mortality trend won't be visible for weeks. So why lhe Hell would anyone look at a data point that literally cannot help but be at least 4 weeks behind the curve in displaying anything useful or enlightening?

Currently, the US new infection growth rate is somewhere between 7 and 8% when averaged over the last few days. This means that the US is currently adding around 34,000 newly identified coronavirus cases every 24 hours. If this rate merely persists for just another 7 days, by April 15th, the US will be adding around around 50,000 new cases every 24 hours.

One hopes that Hashi's guesstimate of the infection rate then plateauing over the following 5 days, then starting to drop turns out to be accurate... because if he's wrong, then the infection numbers start to look more than concerning as one progresses throughout the rest of April.

But even even if on April 16th there was all of a sudden zero new cases, the COVID-19 death numbers would continue to climb for a whole month after that point, bearing in mind treatment time combined with reporting delays - because of the cases already in the pipeline.

Hence why, although I've made a few hopefully informed predictions, namely:-

At least 750,000 US infections by April 15th (though I admit I might have overcalled this by a day or two - it might take until the 18th to hit that figure)

At least 33,000 US deaths by the end of April (that figure I'm certain I've undercalled)

At least 100,000 US deaths by the end of 2020

At least a 7 figure number of global deaths by the end of 2020.

Those last two figures I'm fairly sure I've undercalled too, but will wait till the end of April to see how things are trending then.

As I said to Obi a few posts back, come May 1st, with the benefit not of hindsight, but of a view on what the trends are looking like then, I'll happily admit I was wrong, if that's how things look then. But if by that point, the US has over a million cases of infection (which it will) AND has a new infection growth rate of 5% or more (which it may well, though this is less certain), then I won't be apologising, because the month of May will then deliver some pretty nasty additional numbers.

You specifically asked me for a number of days, not a number of deaths. I answered the question as it was asked.

Entirely agreed and I wasn't intending to suggest anything else. But as per stated earlier, the question I posed was about growth curve in identified COVID-19 infections... I'd never have asked you for an irrelevant number of deaths estimate.

As above, I sincerely hope that your guesstimate that the US will be over the crest of the peak of new infections by Apr 20th is bang on accurate. Sadly from looking at the daily audited figures (and yes, just on confirmed infections), I ever more strongly suspect that you're bang on mistaken - but we'll see soon enough.

[Gaius Octavius]

The US is now projecting about 60,000 deaths rather than 100-250k deaths.

Dr. Zeke Emanuel (Biden adviser, architect of Obamacare) claims that we will need another 18 months, at the very least, of these social distancing/stay at home policies, which is utter lunacy.

I am very rapidly approaching the point where I agree that it isn't worth shutting the economy down for an extended period of time just to save lives from COVID.

[TheFallen]

The IHME model being used by the US and which is predicated on harsh lockdown measures being continued until at least end May is currently spitting out a massive flattening of death numbers (down to only double figures daily) by about May 20th... which is what gives rise to this new c. 60k US deaths by early August estimate.

That seems seriously counter-intuitive at best. I hope they've not been relying on Chinese supplied data.

You know what I'd say? Give them the c. 5 weeks of draconian lockdown that their latest prediction states that it absolutely requires from now till May 20th and see if they're right.

[Gaius Octavius]

The Chinese data is 100% accurate. The CCP doesn't lie. Quit being racist.

Also, Taiwan is a province of the People's Republic of China.

[Ur Dead]

Looks like Russia is skewing their number also.
10K infected with 76 deaths...
I bet they are up to their cotcha's in cases.

[TheFallen]

Okay...

So I've been going through the IHME updated model (the one that's just spat out this sharply downwardly revised number of just 60.4k US COVID-19 deaths by August 4th, provided that rigorous social distancing is imposed at least until the end of May. For those interested, it can be found here - and I'd recommend you take a look.

It looks at a number of factors, including peak daily death numbers, but makes no easily visible prediction on number of identified infections - which as you'll know I find surprising and again entirely counter-intuitive.

Anyhow, the IHME model now predicts a maximum US number of daily deaths on April 12th of 2,212 . Then these numbers according to IHME will start to fall sharply, dropping to 790 predicted daily deaths by May 1st, then down to 96 by May 21st. By June 3rd, IHME predicts 9 new US deaths per day and by the time you get to June 14th, IHME is now modelling zero deaths....

It's this model that is now spitting out the 60.4k total US deaths by August 4th, if draconian lockdown measures remain in place throughout May at least.

I am literally staggered by these latest predictions. The only way that I can possibly make sense of them is if the number of newly identified cases now being reported now massively consists of either asymptomatic individuals or those with merely very mild symptoms.

What is equally bizarre are the predictions made - based on whatever the IHME modelling approach is - for other European countries. There can be seen in the "updates" section of the IHME website here, or via the helpful "Pick a country" dropdown at the top of the IHME main graph page linked to above.

Amongst other things, IHME now predicts a total deaths figure in Italy (up to Aug 4th again, which seems to be the endpoint of their modelling currently) of 20,300.... so apparently just 2,000 more to go then. As of yesterday's audited figures, Italy had reported a total of 18,279 COVID-19 deaths, with 610 being added yesterday alone...

The IHME model predicts that new Italian COVID-19 daily deaths wll fall to single figures by May 2nd ...

For interest, the updated IHME model predicted 380 daily deaths for Italy yesterday (the reported number was actually 610 as just mentioned, but there may be some lag in reporting I suppose?).

IHME further predicts that Spain (currently 15,447 reported deaths as of yesterday, with 655 newly added that day) will only reach 19.2k total deaths by Aug 4th. Similarly it is now also predicting that France (currently 12,210 reported deaths as of yesterday, with 1,347 newly added that day) will only reach 15.1k total deaths by Aug 4th...

The IHME model now predicts that the highest number of COVID-19 deaths will be... in the UK, with 66,300 cumulative deaths predicted by Aug 4th (NB it only models US and Europe). Anyhow, as of yesterday here in the UK, we'd had just under 8,000 total reported COVID-19 deaths. The IHME forecast is more than triple the UK's own current projections...

I am actually not going to comment any more on this set of predictions - because I don't see any value in doing so. It's enough to have pulled out and stated for the record what some of the major ones are.

What I absolutely will say is that what would be incredibly useful for IHME to do - provided that one attaches any credibility to its predictions - is to produce some modelling that predicts what would happen if the current lockdown measures were not in place, or at least lifted nigh on immediately.

Because if their model is in any way accurate - and as above, the only way I can make any sense of it is that the vast majority of those now identified as newly infected cases are either asymptomatic or only have very mild symptoms - then immediately adopting a Swedish model (self-quarantine for two weeks if you're showing flulike symptoms and self-isolate for the foreseeable future if you're in an at-risk group, i.e. elderly or infirm... but nothing more) would seem to be the only sensible course.

If the IHME model is accurate - and I have to tell you that to me this is one fucking huge if - then that would seem to be the only logical conclusion.

It's not what I would do, though. I'd keep lockdown imposed at least until mid-May and then see if IHME's predictions have got anywhere close to reality.

[peter]

Are there any 'meta' modellers out there TF (for want of a better way of putting it)? People or groups (probably mathematicians I'd guess) who are experts in the field of model evaluation across the board as it were. Seems to me that great store is being put in the predictive power of these models - and rightly so no doubt - but in the face of the widely disparate predictions they are throwing out (in the last couple of days I have heard of one that has said the UK is vastly underestimating it's likely death toll and yet another that has said that sixty percent of the population have already had the virus and recovered, lending us the fabled herd immunity already without us even being aware of it - this latter from an Oxford University study so by no means out on a limb stuff) surely it is important to be able to critically appraise the relative merits of this model against that one? I've also heard criticism that the government strategy is based on the modeling of but one particular group (obviously that led by Neil Furguson who we spoke of above) at the expense of consideration of any other model. Do you think there is anything in this criticism? Seems to me that without some method of appraisal vis a vis the comparative merits of these different models, the selection of one over another is simply a blindfold draw. Presumably this is very much not the case?

[TheFallen]

Pete, I am at a complete loss here.

The disconnects between the ICL model (which is informing UK government strategy), the IHME model (which is informing US government strategy and is predicting a much worse outcome for the UK) and the Oxford University model (my old alma mater as it happens and which predicts that even the ICL model is majorly exaggerated in terms of COVID severity for the UK) are simply vast.

I fear that, much like philosophers and politicians, the way to ensure that you get three opinions from allegedly very smart statisticians is to simply ask a maximum of just two of them for theirs.

Frankly - and this is in almost every way ridiculous (or at least should be) - when faced with such a series of wildly differing expert opinions and predictions , I'd rather go with my own hopefully commonsense-based judgement on where the numbers are most likely to fall.

[peter]

Peoples adherence to the dictates of the lockdown are at least nominal at best, from the [ex] Chief Medical Officer of Scotland down to the average Joe in the streets.

Everywhere you look people find ways to circumvent the rulings, bending and twisting like reeds in a storm in order to make their suddenly curtailed lives bearable. I serve hundreds of people per day with the 'basic essentials' I have outlined above. The particularly clement weather has brought people flocking out for beer, hot-dogs and barbecues. Yesterday a man called out through the shop door asking his kid "What do your mates want?" and a tail-back of fourteen miles was reported on the M5 of cars heading down to the West country for the Easter break.

My wife overheard the following shocking conversation between a worker in the hospital she works in and his supervisor.

Worker; Yes - I was pretty poorly last week - temperature and a cough - but it didn't last long and I was only off work for one day.
Supervisor [for contracted out firm who supply ancillary services]; That's okay then.

It beggars belief that after all that they have been told - after all the effort that the government has exerted to ram the message home to them, they simply still don't get it. I expend massive effort each day washing my hands raw between every customer I serve only to hear them tut-tutting over the delay before they pay with cash, ignoring the distance restrictions for the sake of the trivia they are purchasing.

It really makes me think "Why do I bother; Why does the Government bother, when these people take such a cavalier attitude to even their own safety nevef mind anyone else's."

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

TF, I will gently remind you that the initial predictions were based on social distancing.

This was never going to be as big of a deal as it was initially made out to be.

[TheFallen]

TF, I will gently remind you that the initial predictions were based on social distancing.

I am aware of that, Obi. Any modelling that I have recently seen states its total dependency on harsh social distancing - including the very recently revised IHME forecast.

It's not only me who thinks the IHME forecasts are seriously wack, according to this CNN.com article today.

Separately mentioned in that same article, there may be signs of why the IHME revised predictions seem to make no sense... I mean come on, Italy... only 2,000 more deaths modelled over the next 4 months? When there were 610 new deaths announced by the Italians only yesterday? Really? Is it just me?

This was the first time the IHME team published models for several European countries, including the UK. On Wednesday, the institute updated its US forecast, predicting 60,415 deaths in the country, significantly fewer than the 82,000 it predicted on Tuesday.

The researchers based their findings on models of the peak in death rates and hospital usage in Wuhan, the Chinese city which was the original epicenter of the outbreak, as well as data from seven European locations that have peaked, including the Spanish capital of Madrid and the Lombardy region in Italy.

They also factored in data from local and national governments, the World Health Organization and information on each country's social distancing policies.

All emphasis mine.

I have a funny feeling that the revised IHME model and resultant projections are going to be a classic representation of the GIGO rule...

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

I agree that it's GIGO, but looking at the numbers that are being reported - at least in the US - we're flattening out.

The initial call was wrong. The initial estimates were wrong. The decision to shut down the economy was wrong. It's time for everyone to accept reality.