Latest Covid Trend Charts Confirm - No Worse than Really Bad Flu Season

[Mashmont]

Zomg... How did you get this so ridiculously backwards?

Social distancing keeps the number of cases low enough at a given time to make sure that everyone who needs treatment can get treatment. Even if it doesn't work perfectly, it significantly reduces the damage.

Without social distancing, so many people will wind up in the hospital at the same time, that doctors will need to triage. Lemme spell this out for you:

Without social distancing
Hospital X has 100 beds and 10 ventilators. On Monday, 1000 people become so seriously ill with COVID-19 that they need hospitalization. The hospital now has to determine which 100 patients they can accept; and of those 100 patients, they have to further decide which 5 people will be put on ventilators. The hospital also runs out of PPE, which means that COVID-19 spreads to medical staff and to other patients. As a result, 250 people die.


With social distancing
Hospital X has 100 beds and 10 ventilators. On Monday, 20 people become so seriously ill with COVID-19 that they need hospitalization. The hospital has enough beds, ventilators and PPE, so the staff are less likely to get sick. There will still be casualties, but instead of 200 people dying, there are only 2 deaths.


And of course, it is not true that the exact same number of people will get sick and die when we apply social distancing -- e.g. South Korea has brought the number of new cases to extremely low levels, and has effectively contained the spread. If they keep it up, it is highly likely that the number of cases and deaths per capita will be much lower than, say, the US or Italy.

What state was it that bought all these ventilators, then didn't maintain them, and had to fire sale them? Was it New York? That is typical Democratled government mismanagement on display.

 

[3leftsdoo]

COVID-19 = Responsible for far LESS than 1/1,000th of US national death rate

 

[Mashmont]

At this point it is nearly anti-climactic. After weeks of anxiety and increasingly dire forecasts from the armchair alarm mongers the Wuhan Virus (aka COVID-19) will no longer spawn hysterical prognostications of simple-minded and endlessly exponential doom.

The calculus of damage to the economy has yet to be totaled, and the fallout will be ongoing for at least a year or two hence. But for the moment, enjoy the charts:


Note Below: The prior trend lines of worst and best cases have slowly merged as daily data has been posted. By 4/16 the total of all US Wuhan Virus Cases (to date) will be 825,000. By August first there won't be less than 1.65 million cases (most having recovered). And after 4/16 the trend lines will increasingly flatten.

View attachment 67277353


Note: The growth rate of new cases (red trend line) in the figure below has dipped to or below the inflection point. It seems that it will meet the expected 4/8 inflection point in two days, although it could be a day earlier or longer. The expected strong rebound from Sunday's dip didn't happen.

View attachment 67277354


Note Below: The cumulative total of all fatalities to date still shows a trend line intersecting at 35,000 deaths by 4/16 (the day of the peak number of daily fatalities). However the UOW IHME has revised its forecast (see blue dotted line with end point circles) such to 40,000 deaths as of that date, with corresponding increases later (e.g. see 4/27 intersection). It will be interesting to see if the old estimate holds up better.

View attachment 67277355

Note Below: The growth rate of new fatalities has been strongly declining the last few days, and now intersects at 4/11, FIVE days early. That is surprisingly good sign and should it continue it may portend a peak number of daily fatalities of less than 2000 on 4/16.

View attachment 67277356


Note Below: The final chart plots the "daily new deaths" from the virus. Of interest are three lines, the solid, thin, and light blue curved line being the polynomial trend based on actual daily numbers. It forecasts a very low daily peak on 4/16 of 1850 "new" deaths. (See above chart for trend lines early downslope).

The next line in our chart is the original UOW IHME forecast, plotted in red broken by red plot points. It forecast a peak of 2644 "new deaths" on 4/16.

The last line of interest is the 4/6 revised UOW IHME forecast, plotted in light blue and broken by blue plot points. It increased the forecast peak to 3130 deaths.

At this point, to me, it looks like the 2644 number to be the one to hold up, maybe lower. But we shall see.

View attachment 67277357

ALL the indicators are good and some suggest even better news than forecast by the IHME model.

Once the "peak" is reached, I intend to issue a new series of plots of the expected decline and end dates.

I think we've already peaked. We started to plateau April 6, and the descent began Friday into Saturday. Mash predicted this March 25 to much ridicule.

 

[maxparrish]

I think we've already peaked. We started to plateau April 6, and the descent began Friday into Saturday. Mash predicted this March 25 to much ridicule.

On April 6th we reached a point of transitioning, but not a peak. As it turned out April 10th was the peak in the fatality rate as well as that of daily new cases. I'll post a new thread for an update.

 

[year2late]

The problem here is sunk cost fallacy. After having pushed most of the world into full hysterical panic mode, no one important is willing to admit that it was all an overreaction. This has to be The Big One, because why else would we have put everything on pause for it?

I am sorry you are hysterical and panicking.

 

[Mashmont]

On April 6th we reached a point of transitioning, but not a peak. As it turned out April 10th was the peak in the fatality rate as well as that of daily new cases. I'll post a new thread for an update.

Exactly what I said.

 

[maxparrish]

Exactly what I said.

You mean this.



And I'm not objecting to what you said.

 

[minnie616]

Three very special people died today of Covid-19. My sons' Biology teacher, my PCP's NP and a Walmart greeter who brightened every day.

Sorry to read that.
My heart goes out to all their loved ones and to you and your son too who will miss them dearly.

 

[minnie616]

Rarely. But that is the myth being pushed by the leftwing media, that young healthy victims are commonplace. It's a lie

Commonplace?

I hear consistent emphasis on over 60 and pre-existing conditions.

I think what you may be hearing are responses to statements by some (even an asshole governor!!!!) about the young not getting the disease (therefor open the schools)

Commonplace? Not sure how to quantify that.

Certainly not zero. Certainly not all.

Can you show me an example of mainstream media pushing that young healthy victims are commonplace (so we can have a frame of reference to your accusation)

I agree. I think this stat is quite interesting.

Unfortunately, Detroit has the numbers to prove that. Local 4 has obtained the latest numbers of COVID-19 cases. As of Wednesday, [Apil15,2020] Detroit has 7,020 cases and 424 deaths in the city alone.

The top three age groups of cases are as follows:

20% of cases are between the ages of 60-69
19% of cases are between the ages of 50-59
16% of cases are between the ages of 40-49

 

[Aristaeus]

On April 6th we reached a point of transitioning, but not a peak. As it turned out April 10th was the peak in the fatality rate as well as that of daily new cases. I'll post a new thread for an update.

As it turned out, it wasn't.

 

[snakestretcher]

This is preferable to me also. Let the chips fall where they may. over 80% of those who die from this are over 65. Those people generally are retired. If we can lock down an entire state and country we could certainly lock down those over 65-70 who are most at risk. Those under that age either have immunity or suffer minor or medium effects and the other 20% would be treated.

What we are seeing is all these deaths being chalked up automatically as Corona Virus when 80% of them are older people with diabetes, heart disease, stroke, cancer, emphysema, and the whole gamut and they die and are all being counted as "Corona Virus". The question is.....since 80% of those who die are over 65-70 and even older, how many of those really died from Corona Virus and not their preexisting conditions? We won't ever know this.

So, if Coronavirus is on the death certificate as a contributory catalyst, what would you ascribe a person's death to? Bear in mind that sufferers from those conditions mentioned may have many years of life left. My mother lived with cancer for nearly 20 years until she passed at the age of 70.

 

[Crovax]

COVID-19 = Responsible for far LESS than 1/1,000th of US national death rate

 

[JackA]

Social distancing means no special treatment will be given to those with pre-existing conditions to coronavirus. Which means they will die so that more hospital beds and ventilators, for example, will be freed up.

Your attempts at humor aren't working.

 

[Paradoxical]

So, if Coronavirus is on the death certificate as a contributory catalyst, what would you ascribe a person's death to? Bear in mind that sufferers from those conditions mentioned may have many years of life left. My mother lived with cancer for nearly 20 years until she passed at the age of 70.

Mine passed at 75 with emphysema. If she had died in a hospital today in NYC,they would have listed her as a COVID-19 case.

That's what I'm saying.

 

[Mashmont]

Mine passed at 75 with emphysema. If she had died in a hospital today in NYC,they would have listed her as a COVID-19 case.

That's what I'm saying.

Yep. If the left is fraudulent with everything else under the sun, why would they be clean with this? Answer: They aren't.

 

[Paradoxical]

Yep. If the left is fraudulent with everything else under the sun, why would they be clean with this? Answer: They aren't.

I proposed that we take the total deaths in New York from the fist day of the first death alleged by Corona Virus on March 15th from ALL causes, and dsduct from that the deaths they had for the same time period last year, and the difference would be Corona Virus deaths.

They don't seem to want to do it that way. I wonder why Mashmont? I wonder why? Maybe you and I could put our heads together and answer that FOR them?

Maybe the resident left wingers want to chime in on the "unfairness of doing it that way? Maybe because Bad Orange Man won't look so bad?

 

[Mashmont]

So, if Coronavirus is on the death certificate as a contributory catalyst, what would you ascribe a person's death to? Bear in mind that sufferers from those conditions mentioned may have many years of life left. My mother lived with cancer for nearly 20 years until she passed at the age of 70.

So if your mother would have had the corona at age 70, would you have ascribed her death to that or cancer?

 

[snakestretcher]

So if your mother would have had the corona at age 70, would you have ascribed her death to that or cancer?

I leave those decisions to those professionals best qualified to ascertain the cause of death.

 

[Paradoxical]

I leave those decisions to those professionals best qualified to ascertain the cause of death.

Are they doing it that way in your country?

 

[Mashmont]

I proposed that we take the total deaths in New York from the fist day of the first death alleged by Corona Virus on March 15th from ALL causes, and dsduct from that the deaths they had for the same time period last year, and the difference would be Corona Virus deaths.

They don't seem to want to do it that way. I wonder why Mashmont? I wonder why? Maybe you and I could put our heads together and answer that FOR them?

Maybe the resident left wingers want to chime in on the "unfairness of doing it that way? Maybe because Bad Orange Man won't look so bad?

This is a splendid idea. I'l lbet the numbers would be very close.

 

[Mashmont]

I leave those decisions to those professionals best qualified to ascertain the cause of death.

That's kind of the nanny-state attitude they have in Europe. Trust the government and ignore your own common sense. That's why the bold questioning people moved to America and the lemmings stayed behind.

Although we seem to have plenty of lemmings here now. Encouraged, of course, by the leftwing media.

 

[snakestretcher]

That's kind of the nanny-state attitude they have in Europe. Trust the government and ignore your own common sense. That's why the bold questioning people moved to America and the lemmings stayed behind.

Although we seem to have plenty of lemmings here now. Encouraged, of course, by the leftwing media.

Yet another entirely clueless post from a catholic lemming. You're doing great, keep it up!

 

[Paradoxical]

This is a splendid idea. I'l lbet the numbers would be very close.

The more I think about this, my solution is the best and ONLY one to use. This won't be known until we have the data in, either, as much as I would like to know sooner. We know that they are including all comers, so to speak. People who are obese, have heart disease, lung disease, chronic problems, in nursing homes,etc.

So, all we have to do is take an average of how many people WOULD have died. This may seem callous but as they say "Ball don't lie" means "Math don't lie". Somehow we need to get the TOTAL people who died in every city and this should be doable. From that, we subtract what would be expected and the result is the deaths from Corona Virus.

For example, fires cause lots of damage and expense for insurance companies and they keep track of them. Let's say there are brush fires all over America here and there and we have all these people freaking out seeing the totals reported by MSM. Someone like you comes along and says "Calm down. All of those fires weren't brush fires." They bite their nails and say "A fire is still a fire and how can you be so mean and callous and say that someone who lost their home didn't suffer a fire. You counter by saying, "Well, I know it's bad for that to happen but all we're getting is TOTAL fires across the nation and we need to see the background data of whether their house was from a brush fire or not." Their side says that is wrong and you say "I was talking to the President of an insurance company yesterday and he told me all they really need to know is how much MORE they have to pay than they did in the years prior to determine the excess.'

You are confused by the "deer-in-headlights" look and anger and come to find that there is some psychosis going on in the world where the inhabitants want to blame the president for fires because they were hypnotized by some influential people on television and they want ALL fires to go against the ledger. Nothing you could ever say would change their minds. This is what is happening in this mad world today.

 

[cabse5]

Your attempts at humor aren't working.

Extreme social distancing doesn't protect those most at risk to the pandemic since the group which is extremely social distanced can consist of those who are most at risk, those who are asymptomatic and those with slight enough symptoms not to need a hospital. Extreme social distancing kills. Since the crisis period will be artifically longer with extreme social distancing, Extreme social distancing kills.

I know of 2 very close to me who are alive and are most susceptible to the pandemic and I am outraged nothing it being done to protect them more. It's not humor, it's sarcasm. It's anger at the stupidity.

 

[minnie616]

Mine passed at 75 with emphysema. If she had died in a hospital today in NYC,they would have listed her as a COVID-19 case.

That's what I'm saying.

I can’t say how New York records their Covid deaths but Michigan would only add her to their list if she tested positive for Covid 19.

Michigan only counts confirmed cases.



Of course other health conditions could make them sicker and may have hastened their death but every patient who are counted in the numbers were confirmed to have Covid 19.

The state of Michigan is reporting more than 31,000 cases of COVID-19 with more than 2,300 deaths.

As of 10 a.m. on April 19, there were 31,424 cases with 2,391 deaths.



As of April 17, the state is reporting 3,237 people have recovered.

As of April 16, the MDHHS started including a case fatality rate for jurisdictions with at least one confirmed case of COVID-19.

The MDHHS issued the following statement about the case fatality rate:



"The case fatality rate is the proportion of people who have died from causes associated with confirmed COVID-19 infection.It is often used as one of the measures of the severity of illness. However, it is important to note several factors can affect this measurement. The methodology employed to identify confirmed cases of illness can impact on the case fatality rate if the cases identified are more likely to be among people with serious illness. A testing strategy that has historically included prioritizing limited testing resources toward confirming infection of hospitalized cases of disease can lead to the overestimation of serious consequences greater than experienced by the entire population of ill persons. The impact of a low number of cases in any specific jurisdiction can contribute to a less accurate and a falsely high proportion of deaths. The results also hinge on public health's ability to identify and include all associated deaths."

State of Michigan reporting more than 31K COVID-19 cases, with more than 2K deaths | News | wnem.com