Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 122

Thread: Epidemiologist Drastically Reduces COVID-19 Estimates

  1. #41
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,837
    Amen (Given)
    6272
    Amen (Received)
    7738
    Quote Originally Posted by Juvenal View Post
    That's a reasonable question, but it doesn't work, from what I know. Covid-19 isn't just flu-like symptoms, it's people coughing up blood on ventilators filling ICUs.
    Serious cases, yes. But there are indications that the vast majority of cases exhibit relatively mild flu-like symptoms.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  2. #42
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Humanist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,970
    Amen (Given)
    548
    Amen (Received)
    1163
    Quote Originally Posted by mikewhitney View Post
    The UK estimate, when applied to the US, would mean 104,000 deaths (in a population of 330Million). But even the original report said no more than 20,000 in the UK. So your estimate of 2.5 million looks rather high. But if you are into super scary numbers, live by your estimate. The higher end of deaths by flu in the states is 61,000 in a year. So if we stay below this 104,000 in the US (or 20k in the UK), we are have the equivalent of a doubly-bad flu season, not millions in the US.

    Yes. Take a few precautions. Maybe people over 70 should reduce contact with people. And certainly, if possible, reduce the consumption of bat stew.
    v. Update from Ferguson:

    I think it would be helpful if I cleared up some confusion that has emerged in recent days. Some have interpreted my evidence to a UK parliamentary committee as indicating we have substantially revised our assessments of the potential mortality impact of COVID-19. This is not the case. Indeed, if anything, our latest estimates suggest that the virus is slightly more transmissible than we previously thought. Our lethality estimates remain unchanged. My evidence to Parliament referred to the deaths we assess might occur in the UK in the presence of the very intensive social distancing and other public health interventions now in place. Without those controls, our assessment remains that the UK would see the scale of deaths reported in our study (namely, up to approximately 500 thousand).

    The new figures are not as reassuring as I'd hoped.

  3. #43
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,837
    Amen (Given)
    6272
    Amen (Received)
    7738
    Dr. Deborah Birx on Thursday provided encouraging coronavirus numbers suggesting that some of the predictive models were incorrect.

    “There’s no model right now, no reality on the ground, where we can see that 60-70 percent of Americans are going to get infected in the next 10-12 weeks,” she said.

    Without specifically naming the Imperial College, Brix referred to models that predicted there could be 500,000 coronavirus deaths in the United Kingdom and 2.2 million deaths in the United States.

    The scientist of the model revised the estimate of deaths in the United Kingdom to be roughly 20,000 people or fewer.

    Birx said that the actual data coming in from other countries were different than some of the direst projections.

    She noted that in major countries, there was never an attack rate of over one in over 1,000 people.

    “The predictions of the models don’t match the reality on the ground on either China, South Korea, or Italy,” she said.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...s-predictions/

    No doubt this positive report will be met with howls of "But look at these scary, scary numbers over here! We're all DOOMED!"
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  4. Amen NorrinRadd amen'd this post.
  5. #44
    radical strawberry
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Humanist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,970
    Amen (Given)
    548
    Amen (Received)
    1163
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Serious cases, yes. But there are indications that the vast majority of cases exhibit relatively mild flu-like symptoms.
    The pneumonia associated with covid-19 is atypical, which is what led to the discovery that a new virus was presenting in China. That didn't happen this past fall in the US. China's initial response was not honest, but the dishonesty related to their delay in reporting human to human transmission. There's been no suggestion actual cases emerged prior to late December, as far as I'm aware.

  6. #45
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    SoCal!!!
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,311
    Amen (Given)
    341
    Amen (Received)
    852
    Quote Originally Posted by Juvenal View Post
    v. Update from Ferguson:

    I think it would be helpful if I cleared up some confusion that has emerged in recent days. Some have interpreted my evidence to a UK parliamentary committee as indicating we have substantially revised our assessments of the potential mortality impact of COVID-19. This is not the case. Indeed, if anything, our latest estimates suggest that the virus is slightly more transmissible than we previously thought. Our lethality estimates remain unchanged. My evidence to Parliament referred to the deaths we assess might occur in the UK in the presence of the very intensive social distancing and other public health interventions now in place. Without those controls, our assessment remains that the UK would see the scale of deaths reported in our study (namely, up to approximately 500 thousand).

    The new figures are not as reassuring as I'd hoped.
    One link (which I can only partially read on this side of the paywall) is https://www.wsj.com/articles/should-...er-11585239104

    It sounds like Ferguson does not do a very good job. I wonder if he had stated this reasoning in his initial notification of the revised numbers.

    Maybe someone can tell us what information he uses to calculate his numbers. Also, it would be important to note that it is the big cities that would likely have the density of interaction to have significant problems, if the original death rate from Ferguson is correct. And we have potential medicines to treat the worst cases.

    Ferguson's tweet is at:
    https://twitter.com/neil_ferguson/st...94815200124928
    Last edited by mikewhitney; 03-26-2020 at 08:39 PM.

  7. #46
    tWebber demi-conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,114
    Amen (Given)
    168
    Amen (Received)
    569
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post

    “The predictions of the models don’t match the reality on the ground on either China, South Korea, or Italy,” she said.
    R0 and fatality rates are not biological constants but depend on how society responds, whether better treatment is found, and so on*. Every model that you see should come with twenty different asterisks because the predictions make many many significant assumptions.

    *and all of these are changing over time
    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

  8. Amen Mountain Man, NorrinRadd amen'd this post.
  9. #47
    tWebber demi-conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,114
    Amen (Given)
    168
    Amen (Received)
    569
    Quote Originally Posted by Juvenal View Post
    The pneumonia associated with covid-19 is atypical, which is what led to the discovery that a new virus was presenting in China.
    There have been plenty of anecdotes of atypical flu in the winter.
    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

  10. #48
    tWebber demi-conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,114
    Amen (Given)
    168
    Amen (Received)
    569
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    How do you know it didn't? Since the Chinese coronavirus presents with flu like symptoms then it's probable that any related deaths could have been attributed to the common flu since doctors wouldn't have known to test for anything else.
    If it was the coronavirus last fall or winter, then how much the Chinese covered up since late December didn't matter much. If the mild cases are so mistakable for flu, it would have spread to half the countries before the Chinese noticed that something was significantly different and decided to figure it out.
    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

  11. #49
    tWebber demi-conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,114
    Amen (Given)
    168
    Amen (Received)
    569
    Quote Originally Posted by mikewhitney View Post
    One link (which I can only partially read on this side of the paywall) is https://www.wsj.com/articles/should-...er-11585239104

    It sounds like Ferguson does not do a very good job. I wonder if he had stated this reasoning in his initial notification of the revised numbers.

    Maybe someone can tell us what information he uses to calculate his numbers. Also, it would be important to note that it is the big cities that would likely have the density of interaction to have significant problems, if the original death rate from Ferguson is correct. And we have potential medicines to treat the worst cases.

    Ferguson's tweet is at:
    https://twitter.com/neil_ferguson/st...94815200124928
    The original prediction seems to be based on the UK doing nothing much. Now that the UK closed down pubs, colleges, etc, R0 changes and everything has to be revised.
    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

  12. #50
    tWebber demi-conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,114
    Amen (Given)
    168
    Amen (Received)
    569
    Quote Originally Posted by demi-conservative View Post
    R0 and fatality rates are not biological constants but depend on how society responds, whether better treatment is found, and so on*. Every model that you see should come with twenty different asterisks because the predictions make many many significant assumptions.

    *and all of these are changing over time
    Models cause society to change, which changes R0 and invalidates the model. So all the models need to be revised frequently. Since number of projected cases is an exponential function of R0, even just a small change in R0 can lead to a big change in projected cases.

    Separately, the doctors are getting better over time at educated guessing on how to treat the virus and not getting infected themselves, which means that actual fatality rate is changing over time, meaning the models need to be revised over time.
    Last edited by demi-conservative; 03-26-2020 at 08:52 PM.
    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •