Semi-OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread

[Bottomsouth]

Interesting. In my area the older people (50+) at the market seem to be the most likely to be sans mask. It's a "tougher" area in general so I suppose it can be accrued to that mind set, but the younger kids mostly seem to be falling in line.

Concerning your "96% survival rate" though, please do understand that at least 85%+ of those who contract the virus are not tested. Do not for a second think that this virus has a 4% death rate or forward that nonsense.

Iceland has done random tests on 10% of its citizens. They found that about half of infected people at the time of testing showed no symptoms or such mild symptoms that they don't report being sick at all.

about half of its citizenry at any given time who have coronavirus but don't know it, will be asymptomatic – a large percentage many experts studying the virus have suspected, but have had little firm data to corroborate.

https://www.usatoday.com/news/


The World Health Organization has reported that in China 80% of people who got the virus, had mild symptoms up to pneumonia. Most asymptomatic people later developed symptoms of the disease.

Approximately
80% of laboratory confirmed patients have had mild to moderate disease, which includes
non-pneumonia and pneumonia cases, 13.8% have severe disease (dyspnea, respiratory
frequency ≥30/minute, blood oxygen saturation ≤93%, PaO2/FiO2 ratio <300, and/or lung
infiltrates >50% of the lung field within 24-48 hours) and 6.1% are critical (respiratory
failure, septic shock, and/or multiple organ dysfunction/failure). Asymptomatic infection
has been reported, but the majority of the relatively rare cases who are asymptomatic on
the date of identification/report went on to develop disease. The proportion of truly
asymptomatic infections is unclear but appears to be relatively rare and does not appear to
be a major driver of transmission.

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf

Germany's death rate is at 1.6 percent (16x the flu), which is the lowest so far. They have done aggressive testing, but they have also a really strong medical response.

Germany’s fatality rate stood at 1.6 percent, compared with 12 percent in Italy, around 10 percent in Spain, France and Britain, 4 percent in China and nearly 3 percent in the United States. Even South Korea, a model of flattening the curve, has a higher fatality rate, 1.8 percent.

[ . . . ]

“We have so much capacity now we are accepting patients from Italy, Spain and France,” said Susanne Herold, a specialist in lung infections at the hospital who has overseen the restructuring. “We are very strong in the intensive care area.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/04/world/europe/germany-coronavirus-death-rate.html

Iceland have done the most testing and their death rate is looking close to 0.2%.

They tested people who were unwell and got about 1200.

Importantly, they have since tested thousands of people from a random population and found 0.8% were positive. Extrapolate that to their entire population of 365,000 and you have 2920 people (some show mild symptoms but most are asymptomatic).

In total they probably have ~4000 infected and 2000 are asymptomatic (50%). Only 8 people have died.

So currently they sit at 8/4000 = 0.2% mortality rate.

That's the most accurate number we have, it means the virus may be twice as deadly as the flu. Still very scary considering we have no herd immunity and how quickly it spreads.

That can be misleading because Iceland has not tested the entire population or even 10%. I believe they have tested less than 25k since a week ago.

[My Main Man]

That was not the question I asked.

Weird.

Then you need to try again and ask in a clearer way. Your questions were “Like the models?” and “I was just asking what science you were referring to”. Those are both super vague but it sounded like you were alluding to early models that implied kids weren’t affected even though those early models were skewed and have been proven wrong. So what’s your actual question?

I asked where is the science to... if the children went back to school then they would spread it to adults and so on as the original post to where opening schools no matter what extent is not possible. Please provide the actual link with scientific facts to support it.

Here’s just one.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.03.20028423v3

“ The household secondary attack rate was 15%, and children were as likely to be infected as adults.”

[dhsilv2]

Just for the topic but I got my small little "poor person" payment from the government today. I'm not sure how many people are waiting for these things, but as it seems even my boss...who i have no idea why she's getting one but I guess duel incomes and kids and she makes more than her husband? Anyway for those wondering if others are getting them I did and I do fall into the group that's getting phased out which is important because the original statement was it would go out in revers income, of course I filed 2019 and had direct deposit setup.

I'd suggest keeping expectations in check on any federal money. For one, it looks delayed because the IRS is severely understaffed to process tax returns let alone deliver every American a cash payment. Secondly if it is a federal payment that comes in like a tax return, your bank can hold onto it to service any outstanding debt like child support, student loan payments, mortgage payment, business loan etc. The chance of this finding your wallet is rather low.

If you're getting it direct deposited you should by now have it, it seems. Not sure why a majority of people would have it withheld for those reasons...but ok.

[Nuntius]

Iceland has done random tests on 10% of its citizens. They found that about half of infected people at the time of testing showed no symptoms or such mild symptoms that they don't report being sick at all.

https://www.usatoday.com/news/


The World Health Organization has reported that in China 80% of people who got the virus, had mild symptoms up to pneumonia. Most asymptomatic people later developed symptoms of the disease.

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf

Germany's death rate is at 1.6 percent (16x the flu), which is the lowest so far. They have done aggressive testing, but they have also a really strong medical response.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/04/world/europe/germany-coronavirus-death-rate.html

Iceland have done the most testing and their death rate is looking close to 0.2%.

They tested people who were unwell and got about 1200.

Importantly, they have since tested thousands of people from a random population and found 0.8% were positive. Extrapolate that to their entire population of 365,000 and you have 2920 people (some show mild symptoms but most are asymptomatic).

In total they probably have ~4000 infected and 2000 are asymptomatic (50%). Only 8 people have died.

So currently they sit at 8/4000 = 0.2% mortality rate.

That's the most accurate number we have, it means the virus may be twice as deadly as the flu. Still very scary considering we have no herd immunity and how quickly it spreads.

That can be misleading because Iceland has not tested the entire population or even 10%. I believe they have tested less than 25k since a week ago.

Iceland has conducted 36,339 tests. They have a population of 364,134. 36,339 is 9.97% of 364,134 so that's the percentage of their population that they have tested. A hair below 10%.

The Faroe Islands have conducted 5,677 tests. They have a population of 52,110. 5,677 is 10.89% of 52,110 so they have tested more than 10% of their total population (closer to 11%).

The United Arab Emirates have conducted 648,915 tests (which is more than any individual US state). They have a population of 9,599,353. 648,915 is 6.75% of 9,599,353 so that's the percentage of their population that they've tested.

[SSUBluesman]

This is the old election polling issue we can't seem to EVER get past. So and so leads so and so by 3 points in the poll. At the bottom of the screen (hopefully it's there) it states there is a margin of error of +/-5. So news person says that someone is leading in the poll (technically true) and the idiot hearing this thinks that the poll says so and so has a majority of votes according to the "experts". Well no, the experts say it is way too close to conclude anything. Similarly, with models we went in knowing from the start that models were based on VERY limited and poor data and had huge margins for error. And people are now drawing the conclusion that models were wrong because the data was both poorly presented to them and worse, people just don't understand how to read data.

The end result is we now have people claiming the experts were wrong instead of understanding that most of the models were designed to help us prepare for the worst and give hospitals and government officials ideas on how to act. They were never intended to predict the actual number of deaths from them.

Exactly.

Another example of this is weather forecasting, where based on multiple factors you can have a % chance of something happening. If that doesn't happen than the meteorologist "lied" and "doesn't know what they're doing".

I also suspect that if this doesn't completely spiral out of control you'll see a Y2K hindsight effect, where the catastrophic scenarios are avoided because of increased attention and speed to remedy so people claim it to be a media driven hoax (which people are still claiming about corona now).

Yeah blame the people for not understanding a poorly constructed model.

Perhaps it's not their ignorance of basic statistics and probability leads them to erroneously conclude that the models are poorly constructed? Maybe it's naked political posturing, seeing as how the crying about the models neatly coincided with the push to sacrifice more bodies to the capitalist machine, i.e. "opening the country up for business"? Also can't help but notice that these statements often seem to come from the same people who have been downplaying the virus since the beginning and complaining about all the negativity.

No, I'm sure that, just like when arguing about climate change and its models, arguments are made in good faith by knowledgeable, well-informed actors...

[bidde]

Exactly.

Another example of this is weather forecasting, where based on multiple factors you can have a % chance of something happening. If that doesn't happen than the meteorologist "lied" and "doesn't know what they're doing".

I also suspect that if this doesn't completely spiral out of control you'll see a Y2K hindsight effect, where the catastrophic scenarios are avoided because of increased attention and speed to remedy so people claim it to be a media driven hoax (which people are still claiming about corona now).

Yeah blame the people for not understanding a poorly constructed model.

Perhaps it's not their ignorance of basic statistics and probability leads them to erroneously conclude that the models are poorly constructed? Maybe it's naked political posturing, seeing as how the crying about the models neatly coincided with the push to sacrifice more bodies to the capitalist machine, i.e. "opening the country up for business"? Also can't help but notice that these statements often seem to come from the same people who have been downplaying the virus since the beginning and complaining about all the negativity.

No, I'm sure that, just like when arguing about climate change and its models, arguments are made in good faith by knowledgeable, well-informed actors...

You must be ignoring basic statistics and probability if you haven't realized that the IHME model the white house works with is poorly constructed. We have seen enough of their projections miss systematically to conclude that at this point.

[Bottomsouth]

Exactly.

Another example of this is weather forecasting, where based on multiple factors you can have a % chance of something happening. If that doesn't happen than the meteorologist "lied" and "doesn't know what they're doing".

I also suspect that if this doesn't completely spiral out of control you'll see a Y2K hindsight effect, where the catastrophic scenarios are avoided because of increased attention and speed to remedy so people claim it to be a media driven hoax (which people are still claiming about corona now).

Yeah blame the people for not understanding a poorly constructed model.

Perhaps it's not their ignorance of basic statistics and probability leads them to erroneously conclude that the models are poorly constructed? Maybe it's naked political posturing, seeing as how the crying about the models neatly coincided with the push to sacrifice more bodies to the capitalist machine, i.e. "opening the country up for business"? Also can't help but notice that these statements often seem to come from the same people who have been downplaying the virus since the beginning and complaining about all the negativity.

No, I'm sure that, just like when arguing about climate change and its models, arguments are made in good faith by knowledgeable, well-informed actors...

In the end of the day. Facts: the models were wrong.

[bulliedog8]

Yeah blame the people for not understanding a poorly constructed model.

Perhaps it's not their ignorance of basic statistics and probability leads them to erroneously conclude that the models are poorly constructed? Maybe it's naked political posturing, seeing as how the crying about the models neatly coincided with the push to sacrifice more bodies to the capitalist machine, i.e. "opening the country up for business"? Also can't help but notice that these statements often seem to come from the same people who have been downplaying the virus since the beginning and complaining about all the negativity.

No, I'm sure that, just like when arguing about climate change and its models, arguments are made in good faith by knowledgeable, well-informed actors...

In the end of the day. Facts: the models were wrong.

And they took into account 100% compliance to shelter in place and social distancing until the end of May. So the models were literally based on a best case scenario.

On top of that. It isnt like people have been great with shelter in place too. I have never seen so many people outside for exercise. Only difference is now, instead of people being at work and going to restaurants and others places. We have millions more that need to go to grocery stores in a smaller window frame than previously. Before you would have 24/7 grocery stores. Now you have 6am - 10pm. So more people who need to go to stores in a smaller time frame to get what they need. It makes no sense.

[Swish1906]

The $600 Ui boosts just started going through along with the stimulus $1200. Fairly solid/streamlined implementation there.

Man you guys getting screwed in America

It is $600 a week extra on top of one's unemployment pay ($150-$600 for most, depends on your income and your state). It's actually a hefty pay raise for a huge chunk of America. Not seeing how that is being screwed.

Maybe in having pretty much non existent worker rights comparing to other countries?

[shakes0]

Is everyone getting $1200? I just got mine for me and the wife and it's only $452.15. Anyone else get an odd amount like that?

edit: nevermind, found the math and figured it out.

[dhsilv2]

Exactly.

Another example of this is weather forecasting, where based on multiple factors you can have a % chance of something happening. If that doesn't happen than the meteorologist "lied" and "doesn't know what they're doing".

I also suspect that if this doesn't completely spiral out of control you'll see a Y2K hindsight effect, where the catastrophic scenarios are avoided because of increased attention and speed to remedy so people claim it to be a media driven hoax (which people are still claiming about corona now).

Yeah blame the people for not understanding a poorly constructed model.

Perhaps it's not their ignorance of basic statistics and probability leads them to erroneously conclude that the models are poorly constructed? Maybe it's naked political posturing, seeing as how the crying about the models neatly coincided with the push to sacrifice more bodies to the capitalist machine, i.e. "opening the country up for business"? Also can't help but notice that these statements often seem to come from the same people who have been downplaying the virus since the beginning and complaining about all the negativity.

No, I'm sure that, just like when arguing about climate change and its models, arguments are made in good faith by knowledgeable, well-informed actors...

There are plenty of people who know math well enough to read these things who still want to question the motives behind the models and thus the models themselves. I'm not sure what leads to this mentality, but it's without a doubt held by even those who have legitimate math based educations.

[dhsilv2]

Yeah blame the people for not understanding a poorly constructed model.

Perhaps it's not their ignorance of basic statistics and probability leads them to erroneously conclude that the models are poorly constructed? Maybe it's naked political posturing, seeing as how the crying about the models neatly coincided with the push to sacrifice more bodies to the capitalist machine, i.e. "opening the country up for business"? Also can't help but notice that these statements often seem to come from the same people who have been downplaying the virus since the beginning and complaining about all the negativity.

No, I'm sure that, just like when arguing about climate change and its models, arguments are made in good faith by knowledgeable, well-informed actors...

You must be ignoring basic statistics and probability if you haven't realized that the IHME model the white house works with is poorly constructed. We have seen enough of their projections miss systematically to conclude that at this point.

But was it the model or the inputs?

These kinds of models have HUGE error rates and that's a given. If a model says 100k people will die by the 25th and 20k are dead, that's likely still within a reasonable margin of error.

[dhsilv2]

Is everyone getting $1200? I just got mine for me and the wife and it's only $452.15. Anyone else get an odd amount like that?

edit: nevermind, found the math and figured it out.

You must have made a decent income...

[bidde]

Perhaps it's not their ignorance of basic statistics and probability leads them to erroneously conclude that the models are poorly constructed? Maybe it's naked political posturing, seeing as how the crying about the models neatly coincided with the push to sacrifice more bodies to the capitalist machine, i.e. "opening the country up for business"? Also can't help but notice that these statements often seem to come from the same people who have been downplaying the virus since the beginning and complaining about all the negativity.

No, I'm sure that, just like when arguing about climate change and its models, arguments are made in good faith by knowledgeable, well-informed actors...

You must be ignoring basic statistics and probability if you haven't realized that the IHME model the white house works with is poorly constructed. We have seen enough of their projections miss systematically to conclude that at this point.

But was it the model or the inputs?

These kinds of models have HUGE error rates and that's a given. If a model says 100k people will die by the 25th and 20k are dead, that's likely still within a reasonable margin of error.

It is the model, not the inputs. I'm also well aware of the error rates. The problem is that the real numbers are outside the confidence interval of the projections systematically and at far higher rate than would be expected if the confidence intervals were correct.

[mtron929]

In general, accurate model of exponential behavior is extremely difficult. Basically, if few parameters (e.g. Ro) are off by just a little bit, the final death counts will easily be off by an order of a magnitude even if everything else is perfect. Moreover, it doesn't help that one cannot accurately take into people's level of social distancing as this feeds back into the model. Within these kind of constraints, you need to give a lot of leeway to the error bounds here. People should realize that this is not as easy as predicting whether a comet will hit earth. The order of difficulty is off the chart.

[dhsilv2]

You must be ignoring basic statistics and probability if you haven't realized that the IHME model the white house works with is poorly constructed. We have seen enough of their projections miss systematically to conclude that at this point.

But was it the model or the inputs?

These kinds of models have HUGE error rates and that's a given. If a model says 100k people will die by the 25th and 20k are dead, that's likely still within a reasonable margin of error.

It is the model, not the inputs. I'm also well aware of the error rates. The problem is that the real numbers are outside the confidence interval of the projections systematically and at far higher rate than would be expected if the confidence intervals were correct.

Why do you think the inputs were accurate? We're still discussing if this is airborn for example. We still don't have a reasonable death rate number. In short, we're still learning about this thing so of course these models were off and most of the models being cited were designed to error towards a more "worse case" scenario because their purpose was NOT to predict the actual results, but to prepare governments and healthcare systems for the worst case.

Also worth asking but when the models says 100% social distancing...what does that mean?

[basketballRob]

Iceland have done the most testing and their death rate is looking close to 0.2%.

They tested people who were unwell and got about 1200.

Importantly, they have since tested thousands of people from a random population and found 0.8% were positive. Extrapolate that to their entire population of 365,000 and you have 2920 people (some show mild symptoms but most are asymptomatic).

In total they probably have ~4000 infected and 2000 are asymptomatic (50%). Only 8 people have died.

So currently they sit at 8/4000 = 0.2% mortality rate.

That's the most accurate number we have, it means the virus may be twice as deadly as the flu. Still very scary considering we have no herd immunity and how quickly it spreads.

That can be misleading because Iceland has not tested the entire population or even 10%. I believe they have tested less than 25k since a week ago.

Iceland has conducted 36,339 tests. They have a population of 364,134. 36,339 is 9.97% of 364,134 so that's the percentage of their population that they have tested. A hair below 10%.

The Faroe Islands have conducted 5,677 tests. They have a population of 52,110. 5,677 is 10.89% of 52,110 so they have tested more than 10% of their total population (closer to 11%).

The United Arab Emirates have conducted 648,915 tests (which is more than any individual US state). They have a population of 9,599,353. 648,915 is 6.75% of 9,599,353 so that's the percentage of their population that they've tested.

What are the demographics of the people they tested? Just under 30 year olds?

Sent from my SM-G950U using RealGM mobile app

[bidde]

In general, accurate model of exponential behavior is extremely difficult. Basically, if few parameters (e.g. Ro) are off by just a little bit, the final death counts will easily be off by an order of a magnitude even if everything else is perfect. Moreover, it doesn't help that one cannot accurately take into people's level of social distancing as this feeds back into the model. Within these kind of constraints, you need to give a lot of leeway to the error bounds here. People should realize that this is not as easy as predicting whether a comet will hit earth. The order of difficulty is off the chart.

Well, in general all of that is true. In practice for the model we are talking about R0 isn't a parameter and it doesn't even attempt to model the level of social distancing. But just keep on lecturing me on something you couldn't even be bothered to look at.

[mtron929]

In general, accurate model of exponential behavior is extremely difficult. Basically, if few parameters (e.g. Ro) are off by just a little bit, the final death counts will easily be off by an order of a magnitude even if everything else is perfect. Moreover, it doesn't help that one cannot accurately take into people's level of social distancing as this feeds back into the model. Within these kind of constraints, you need to give a lot of leeway to the error bounds here. People should realize that this is not as easy as predicting whether a comet will hit earth. The order of difficulty is off the chart.

Well, in general all of that is true. In practice for the model we are talking about R0 isn't a parameter and it doesn't even attempt to model the level of social distancing. But just keep on lecturing me on something you couldn't even be bothered to look at.

Umm. Was I replying to you? I didn't even read any of your posts.

[Nuntius]

That can be misleading because Iceland has not tested the entire population or even 10%. I believe they have tested less than 25k since a week ago.

Iceland has conducted 36,339 tests. They have a population of 364,134. 36,339 is 9.97% of 364,134 so that's the percentage of their population that they have tested. A hair below 10%.

The Faroe Islands have conducted 5,677 tests. They have a population of 52,110. 5,677 is 10.89% of 52,110 so they have tested more than 10% of their total population (closer to 11%).

The United Arab Emirates have conducted 648,915 tests (which is more than any individual US state). They have a population of 9,599,353. 648,915 is 6.75% of 9,599,353 so that's the percentage of their population that they've tested.

What are the demographics of the people they tested? Just under 30 year olds?

Sent from my SM-G950U using RealGM mobile app

No idea. These are the numbers I was using -> https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries