Page 80 of 396
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:50 pm
by Canoerebel
Early today, Ranger posted this link:
https://medium.com/six-four-six-nine/ev ... 767def5894
I've just started reading through it. Again, the odd experience of reading thoughts previously articulated in here at length. As though this Forum really is a remarkable set.
Here's one chart that caught my eye:
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:58 pm
by Canoerebel
Like us, his focus is on the bell-shaped curve plus China and South Korea.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:03 pm
by Canoerebel
He finds at least some encouraging date among the trending in Italy.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:06 pm
by Kull
ORIGINAL: geofflambert
The NYT said a day ago that the US had tested 25,000 while New South Wales, Australia had tested 33,000. Australia is in the Southern Hemisphere and experiencing Summer, where the virus has gone "poof", not there.
Please don't spread disinformation. Here's the chart I posted "a day ago":
ORIGINAL: Kull
As of today, the test count is 150K, which puts the US at 4th in the world.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:12 pm
by Canoerebel
Input on how estimates of mortality rate seem to be declining across the board.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:16 pm
by Canoerebel
That source also has some interesting insight into sickness onset (on average, far less than the 14 days currently cited) and the low odds of catching the virus when exposed, varying depending mainly on length of the time of the exposure. Even having a positive person in your household carries relatively low odds (10%). Casual exposure in the workplace gives a 0.5% chance.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:23 pm
by Canoerebel
Insight into why Germany's mortality rate is so much lower than Italy's (plus how USA might compare).
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:27 pm
by Canoerebel
Why self-isolating at home may have a drastically different impact than desired.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:51 pm
by pontiouspilot
Our province is testing 463 persons/100K, the highest rate in Canada. I'm no huge fan of our system but the central authority and universality is proving it's worth in this case. Even that test rate isn't high enough. Iceland plans to test everybody. We need to isolate the non-symptomatic carriers; testing and repeat testing is the only way.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:53 pm
by alanschu
ORIGINAL: Ian R
Hang on, the 'amount' is a fraction of infections - more deaths does not mean the rate of deaths has increased, if the spread of infection went up more.
Where is the overall calculation that includes both total known infections, and total known deaths?
The WHO site probably has one. We should look at that.
I'm literally just talking about how many people are dying per day, and that that number is going getting higher each day.
It is
definitely because more people are exposed to the virus. I do realize that I used "death rates" in an ambiguous way, but I'm just talking about the raw numbers of people dying is higher now than it ever has been.
I don't believe that the disease has a higher "death rate," but that the rate at which people are dying is higher now than it ever has been.
I did this because it's a useful metric (from a statistical analysis) to assess the likelihood of achieving a total death toll of 38,000. Because the raw numbers of people dead per day is the highest it's ever been, and still accelerating, a 38,000 death toll is IMO super optimistic.
2 days ago the death toll was 10,000, and as of right now it's just below 13,000. The bulk of these numbers are also coming from European countries.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 3:01 pm
by alanschu
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Why self-isolating at home may have a drastically different impact than desired.
I was under the impression that Singapore was pretty aggressive in their contact mitigation strategies.
They saw an uptick of 40 cases and have banned gatherings larger than 250 and mandating stricter spacing. From a newspaper yesterday:
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ ... separation
Stressing that it cannot be business as usual, task force co-chair Lawrence Wong, the Minister for National Development, said that the aim was to have fewer people out and about, and a reduction in social gatherings and any activity that could be a potential social vector for the virus.
On how the safe distancing measures will be enforced, Mr Wong said this can be done in several ways.
For example, food and beverage outlets that are licensed will have to close some tables.
"So it is not an option, it is not advisory, it is mandatory," he said.
"We will start tomorrow and it will take some time to roll out fully but we will aim to do so as quickly as possible."
He added: "We do not want to see crowded venues, we do not want to see packed event halls. We should see more work from home, more takeaways.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 3:08 pm
by Canoerebel
Singers just ramped up its restrictions yesterday (3/20) and they are still much notably less stringent than those in most of the USA now. Allowing gatherings of 250 or less in comparison to here, where a sizeable percentage of the country is limited to small gatherings and/or shelter-in-home requirements. (I'm not commenting on whether any particular restriction is better or worse - just that there are in fact differences - and the possibility that shelter-in-home might have unintended consequences.)
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 3:29 pm
by RangerJoe
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Singers just ramped up its restrictions yesterday (3/20) and they are still much notably less stringent than those in most of the USA now. Allowing gatherings of 250 or less in comparison to here, where a sizeable percentage of the country is limited to small gatherings and/or shelter-in-home requirements. (I'm not commenting on whether any particular restriction is better or worse - just that there are in fact differences - and the possibility that shelter-in-home might have unintended consequences.)
Yes, starting nine months later . . . [8|]
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 4:29 pm
by Canoerebel
It took me about two hours to get that.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 4:45 pm
by RangerJoe
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
It took me about two hours to get that.
[:D]
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 5:01 pm
by alanschu
I actually don't get it! I'm assuming it's more of a WW2 thing
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 5:08 pm
by Canoerebel
Thank goodness I'm not the only one, alanschu!
Self-isolation at home may have unintended consequences, nine months down the road, if a member of the opposite sex of suitable age and availability is also there.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:11 pm
by BBfanboy
ORIGINAL: Zerberus_MatrixForum
Cost of testing is not a topic here, the slogan is "whatever it takes".
Nevertheless there is a change in testing strategy, especially in southern Germany (still not yet the whole country).
It's said, that the limited testing ressources are concentrated now on vulnerable groups, that means persons with symptoms and older than 65 or already chronical ill or medical workforce. It becomes harder from day to day to test area-wide. People should stay at home, when they have mild symptoms only.
South Korea seems to be no model anymore, because the situation is not comparable. There you had a managable group of infections caused by this crazy religious group, which you could contain and track down. Here, and of course in other european countries, you have a nationwide impact from travellers all over the country, coming back from winter holidays.
Another point is, that tests of people without any symptoms are not safe enough. The first 2 - 3 days after infection tests are often negative, so you have to test the same people 2 - 3 times.
Source for this information is Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung ,that means a reputable nationwide paper (article has to be paid and is in german)
https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/coronavirus-krise-wer-darf-sich-noch-testen-lassen-16688735.html?premium
The medical workforce one is not a one-time test per person. These people are potentially in contact with infected patients and the aim is to prevent the medical staff from transferring the virus to other patients or their families. As I understand it, the tests do not detect the infection for the first week, so each medical worker should be tested once a week - ideally. I don't think we will ever get that many test kits available or get that disciplined in our efforts. Waiting for symptoms seems to be the norm.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:20 pm
by Zerberus_MatrixForum
A test result within 45 min?
This could be a big step forward for area-wide testing ...
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/21/fda-grants-emergency-use-coronavirus-test-that-can-deliver-results-in-45-minutes.html
Cepheid has received emergency authorization from the Food and Drug Administration to use its rapid molecular test for point-of-care patients that can detect coronavirus in 45 minutes.
This is the first coronavirus that can be conducted entirely at the point of care for patients and deliver results in less than an hour.
RE: OT: Corona virus
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:21 pm
by BBfanboy
ORIGINAL: Ian R
ORIGINAL: alanschu
ORIGINAL: Ian R
What is your source for saying death rates were lower than they are now?
Referring to the changes in *new* deaths, it was in the link. The amount of new deaths per day continues to accelerate.
Hang on, the 'amount' is a fraction of infections - more deaths does not mean the rate of deaths has increased, if the spread of infection went up more.
Where is the overall calculation that includes both total known infections, and total known deaths?
The WHO site probably has one. We should look at that.
WHO gets its figures from countries, which have differing standards for testing and reporting and might even suppress some data. We need data from a county that is doing a good job of tracking and counting without hiding anything. Italy is at that point now and as Canoerebel has been pointing out their stats are the best indicator of what we might face. The high death rate among Italy's males is a wrinkle that may not apply everywhere. We will have to watch what happens in other countries in their mortality stats.