Standup Zone Forum

General Category => Random => Topic started by: Beasho on March 18, 2020, 01:15:35 PM

Title: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 18, 2020, 01:15:35 PM
I worked frantically over the weekend to get data and to get a perspective on this COVID-19 virus.

I shared some screen shots on Facebook and people appreciated the DATA.  My Microsoft Expert friends, Kellan and Rob at PowerPivotPro.com offered to host.

I will improve the views but if this helps anyone who wants to see the tail of the comet GREAT!  Feel free to Share. 

This is updated DAILY and is INTERACTIVE.

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9&fbclid=IwAR2WFQVgpluQNy6vBDeaBMS98Njnl6Igb3HR1bvqxEPOESxdzuJOOGEGz7g

Will provide these views:
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Bulky on March 18, 2020, 02:16:46 PM
Wow, very interesting.  Two questions:

1)  what do you make of the huge spike in China on 2/17?  Can that actually be accurate tracking of disease spread or was there some kind of reporting influx.  Hard to believe it would immediately drop to the previous day's territory.

2)  What do you make of the 3/17 spike in America?  that's a scary jump.

I'll certainly keep monitoring this.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 18, 2020, 02:23:32 PM
China spike was some sort of Data Collection phenomena aka they were playing catch up with data.

US Spike yesterday.  That's also a potential data delay.  The US data wasn't coming in for 2 days.  So next day may drop. T

his is WHO data that also tends to lag the Johns Hopkins reports.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on March 18, 2020, 02:42:27 PM
These charts confuse me a lot when I compare to the reaction we are having here in the US.

I mean I am hearing estimates that NY state will get 750k cases even though they have pretty maximal control over everyone and China only got to 85k cases for 1.4bn people. Where is the correlation?

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on March 18, 2020, 04:16:50 PM
Is there any graph that takes population into account? China has a lot more people than Singapore, the number of deaths per population will graph different than per country
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on March 18, 2020, 06:42:04 PM
Here's an interesting infection model simulation. One of the surprising elements is that social distancing works better than quarantine--or at least it does in the simulation. Neither quarantines on social distancing will eliminate the pandemic, but it buys time. And as any matrix calculation shows, time is most precious. Of course, the number of infections won't really decline and stay suppressed until there is enough immunity to slow the spread, and that won't happen for quite a while. The asymptomatic or sick but not tested rate is probably a factor of ten greater than the reported rates.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Bean on March 18, 2020, 07:32:54 PM
That simulator really gets the point across. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on March 18, 2020, 08:13:04 PM
What's interesting is my teenage son is a gamer, so he's fine just isolating himself in his computer cave for weeks on end. All his buddies are gamer's, so he's having a great time. We just toss him some food now and then. My daughter who had to come home from college is just chomping at the bit to get out. I keep telling her sanitize her hands after she touches the door at Starbucks (take-out only) and please just stay home! We've set up a disinfecting protocol for when my nurse wife returns from the battlefield. The gate gets wiped, the door knobs, counters, etc. get wiped down. My homemade Purell is in bottles all over the house. I'm making some for all the cars too. I paddled about 5 miles yesterday, all by myself. It felt nice to get out on the ocean away from everything. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Fishman on March 18, 2020, 11:31:23 PM
Today reports 475 CV 19 deaths in Italy in one day is a crazy change of pace. The above graph would look a lot different with this day included.  A number of news outlets are reporting this but I hope they just got the data wrong somehow.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on March 18, 2020, 11:57:03 PM
Today reports 475 CV 19 deaths in Italy in one day is a crazy change of pace. The above graph would look a lot different with this day included.  A number of news outlets are reporting this but I hope they just got the data wrong somehow.

I'm thinking the data is accurate. Here (https://apple.news/A7eyk1UMeR26Sccgv8OYAqg) is an interesting read as to what's going on in Italy. I think there is a shit storm happening and it's headed our way real soon.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfinJ on March 19, 2020, 12:28:15 AM
Italy had almost 500 deaths yesterday and with about a five day lag in France we had 89. The eventual exponential increases are happening here.  Hopefully the quarantine will slow it a bit   

Deaths make the news and graphs of the virus seem scary. However with a 1-3% death rate the larger number of critical patients,
up 20% that will need resuscitation is very concerning. This is where the serious suffering amount the sick and the drama amongst the healthcare workers will come.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on March 19, 2020, 07:38:08 AM
The WAPost model is pretty good. It shows that full quarantine is less effective than social distancing. Obviously because as soon as the quarantine is lifted the virus spreads quickly.

UK, Norway, Sweden and maybe some others are using a quarantine of old and sick (vulnerable) people and social distancing for everyone else, without closing businesses etc. Will be really interesting to watch which models prove best. Let the virus spread through the younger populations to build herd immunity and keep the cases out of the hospitals which you save for the quarantined high risk individuals.

Then require folks who test positive to quarantine for 2 weeks. Americans will not stay put for 30 days, at some point the people in power need to consider human nature. The virus is here, there is no point in not letting the herd immunity grow among those who can handle it, especially at the detriment to the economy. The high risk class are largely retired anyway.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on March 19, 2020, 08:08:28 AM
The point, of course, is to let acquired immunity grow without overwhelming medical facilities. That's the entire idea of flattening the curve. It's not to stop the infection, we don't have any tools available to do that. It's to be able to provide care to people who need it.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on March 19, 2020, 08:53:44 AM
On the question of immunity, my understanding is that we don’t yet know if we will build immunity to Covid 19??? I know it makes sense that we will, but our Provincial Medical Health Officer was asked this very question a couple of days ago, and her response was that it is too early too tell for certain.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 19, 2020, 08:54:53 AM
Here is a graphic I built last weekend. 

The Corona Virus does discriminate AGAINST THOSE WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS.  I observed this on Saturday March 14th after running the numbers, jumped to my wife “My gosh I can see what the Corona Virus is doing.”  I tell my kids there is nothing that is 100% sure or 0%.  But then I saw a Corona report with 0% fatalities for kids age 0-9. This does NOT exist in nature.  I put together this view to show that COVID-19 was NOT likely attacking the OLD but rather attacking the accumulation of CoMorbities that older people acquire. 

Bloomberg just confirmed this hypothesis. 

Do the Venn Diagram in your head of people you know and DISTANCE YOURSELF.  People will DIE.

99% of Fatalities had 1, 2 or 3 Pre-Existing conditions:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Dwight (DW) on March 19, 2020, 09:53:48 AM
Thanks Beasho. I feel a little better after reading that article.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on March 19, 2020, 10:13:43 AM
Hi Beasho,

Thanks for the work you are doing. From what I can see, your conclusions are based on the numbers out of Italy, but I’m wondering about the recent article in the New York Times stating that younger people are making up a big portion of those hospitalized in the U.S. from Covid 19 (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/younger-adults-comprise-big-portion-of-coronavirus-hospitalizations-in-us/ar-BB11nGEB). They were clear to point out in the article that they did not have any information on whether or not these younger people had any kind of underlying conditions and if they do, that would fall into line with what you’ve found in Italy. It just seems a little unlikely to me that this many young people would have compromised systems???

Wetstuff just posted a couple of links in another thread that basically say young people are getting ill, but are not dying.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Bulky on March 19, 2020, 11:02:09 AM
When does the data update each day, Beasho?  The date still says 3/17 like it did yesterday.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 19, 2020, 12:42:50 PM
When does the data update each day, Beasho?  The date still says 3/17 like it did yesterday.

Bad Data - Bad!  Lots of moving parts.  I am not an IT department.  I keep hammering the system here locally and the data hasn't been updated.  Usually it happens later Pacific Time. 

The hosted model is refreshing automatically every 2 hours. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 19, 2020, 02:30:26 PM
I'm not sure which of the seven threads to post this in, but here goes. 

Nice podcast from a Harvard MD, recorded today.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/coronavirus-resource-center

I found that link in the sources of this channel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtN-goy9VOY

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 19, 2020, 06:05:38 PM
Refreshed on the STATE Data.  NOT F----G Good!
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 19, 2020, 10:52:44 PM
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/85502
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: tarquin on March 19, 2020, 11:32:53 PM
Nice work. You are obviously a numbers man!
 As one of the top doctors in Paris keeps saying once you can see sick people it's too late! People were also asking about data and numbers. He simply said if you think the data is scary think that  it only shows known cases. It's only the tip of the iceberg we are seeing. Please stay home. People aren't taking this seriously enough.
 They are already saying the 2 week confinement here in France will be extended. It took nearly 2 months in China and when they say stay home people stay home!
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfinJ on March 20, 2020, 06:16:09 AM
We can’t try to shape our behavior on lagging data. The Asians will come out ahead of us on this because their governments are harsher, the people more obedient and they started testing early.

We can not match that, but we will have to do our best.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: fatfish on March 20, 2020, 08:06:21 AM
Hey Beasho
Love the dashboards.  Where are you getting the raw data from?  I am an analytics guy too.  Are your dashboards out in cloud for others to refresh or play with?  thanks.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: fatfish on March 20, 2020, 09:47:49 AM
Hey Beasho
Love the dashboards.  Where are you getting the raw data from?  I am an analytics guy too.  Are your dashboards out in cloud for others to refresh or play with?  thanks.

Beasho, i found a dataset out on the Kaggle site.  Pretty cool info.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 20, 2020, 10:57:01 AM
https://medium.com/nightingale/ten-considerations-before-you-create-another-chart-about-covid-19-27d3bd691be8

I don't have a subscription to the NYT. This link is working for me at the moment. YMMV.  I'm in the same bubble as a bartender - I'm turning away work and they are locked out.  No opinion on the validity of the chart, other than I like charts like this.  So much data...       

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/15/business/economy/coronavirus-worker-risk.html

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 20, 2020, 11:24:09 AM
Hey Beasho
Love the dashboards.  Where are you getting the raw data from?  I am an analytics guy too.  Are your dashboards out in cloud for others to refresh or play with?  thanks.
Please Share.  The data sets have been moving a bit.  My primary WHO data was being collected by a 3rd party but stopped.  I found a reliable source Johns Hopkins that has State level information and a new set from the European's:

Data: GitHuB Johns Hopkins
https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19/blob/master/csse_covid_19_data/csse_covid_19_time_series/time_series_19-covid-Recovered.csv
From:
https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19/find/master   Time Series

European Center for Disease Control: Active
Excel Based: We Need Web Based CSV Input
https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/download-todays-data-geographic-distribution-covid-19-cases-worldwide

Our World In Data:  This has been my primary source
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-source-data
File here: CSV Format
https://covid.ourworldindata.org/data/full_data.csv



Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: fatfish on March 20, 2020, 12:32:08 PM
Beasho

This is the one that i found this morning.  Has daily data as well, up to 3/18.

https://www.kaggle.com/sudalairajkumar/novel-corona-virus-2019-dataset/data#covid_19_data.csv

For US:
https://www.kaggle.com/sudalairajkumar/covid19-in-usa
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 21, 2020, 02:02:11 AM
The CDC is updating daily.  They are still considering the US in the Initiation phase.  With more testing coming available and with the disease entering the acceleration phase in hotspots this is going to be a rough news week.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/summary.html
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/national-strategy/intervals-framework.html

Different parts of the country are seeing different levels of COVID-19 activity. The United States nationally is currently in the initiation phases, but states where community spread is occurring are in the acceleration phase. The duration and severity of each phase can vary depending on the characteristics of the virus and the public health response.

(https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/images/pif-influenza-intervals.jpg)
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on March 21, 2020, 09:49:42 AM
We should see a false peak in about a week as the effects of social distancing and other measures take place. More testing of the general public means a lot more cases, but we should see a decline in the number of people hospitalized. Of course as soon as people relax their efforts the infections and then the hospitalization should trend up again. We'll see.

The most distressing thing is that the virus is so evenly distributed in the USA. The lack of effective measures early on to slow the spread (Nero fiddled while COVID burned) means there's no way to apply more extreme measures to deal with hot spots. From a herd immunity standpoint, this is just fine. Absent a tested and effective vaccine, acquired immunity is what will stop the infection. From a personal (vs. herd) perspective this is criminally disastrous. The current pattern and progression mean the curve isn't going to be as flat as it easily could have been.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Chan on March 21, 2020, 10:44:59 AM
I'm sure many of you have already seen this one.  It's the most comprehensive current statistical and prognostic study I've read.  This is the report cited for many of the recent policy shifts in the US and Europe. 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 21, 2020, 03:11:53 PM
I'm sure many of you have already seen this one.  It's the most comprehensive current statistical and prognostic study I've read.  This is the report cited for many of the recent policy shifts in the US and Europe. 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

That Imperial College report was what pushed me over edge.  I now YELL FROM THE SOAP BOX. 

COVID-19 DOES NOT KILL RANDOMLY.  IT KILLS PEOPLE WITH PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS.

Every report, or death, or supposed exception reinforces this finding.  1 in 99 people appear to be 'random' the other 99 had some pre-existing condition.

This latest NY Times has somebody that finally suggest - Corona may just be front-running what was going to kill them soon.

"Two-thirds of those who died in Italy had pre-existing medical conditions and were also elderly; Dr. David L. Katz, the former director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University, notes that many might have died soon of other causes even if the coronavirus had not struck.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/20/opinion/sunday/coronavirus-outcomes.html
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 21, 2020, 03:14:41 PM
This got me wondering again "How different is COVID-19 from a normal Flu?"  Then I found this information about the greatest number of deaths in the United States potentially since the Spanish Flu in 1918.

80,000 People died in 2018 - 2 Years Ago!!!!!

Really!!!!!!  Read the description of who was impacted.  Sounds very similar.  But with 400X more dead than the data from Yesterday.

From January 8th, 2018:
"Combine with that the fact that people over 50 — and especially people in their 70s, 80s, and beyond — are less healthy and have less robust immune systems. They may have health conditions like diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or heart disease. They have a harder time shaking off an illness like the flu."

Source 1: https://www.statnews.com/2018/09/26/cdc-us-flu-deaths-winter/
Source 2: https://www.statnews.com/2018/01/08/flu-virus-h3n2/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 21, 2020, 03:23:37 PM
Deaths in the USA stand at 150 in this report.  Maybe up to 250 by the end of today.

Assuming 200 --> 80,000 / 200 = 400 TIMES MORE DEATHS 2 Years Ago from the FLU. 

Any way you cut it this has a long way to go to get to 80,000.  The United States is CURRENTLY near ZERO on this Graph.

People like to say we have 2 weeks to catch up to ITALY.  BUT THE US RECORDED CASES IN THE UNITED STATES 10 DAYS BEFORE ITALY.

If as everyone assumes the United States is terrible at measuring then we have MANY MANY MANY more infections.  There is no way there are 1,000's + 1,000's of random people dying of pneumonia and NOT BEING COUNTED right now.

As measured by Deaths Per Running Day since FIRST MEASURED CASE:  Italy, Iran and China have been 15X to 25X more lethal than the United States.  That's 1500% to 2500% more deadly.  No ambiguity to the extreme difference. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfinJ on March 22, 2020, 12:39:03 AM
You are behind us in time.  The incubation period is the calm before the storm as we continue to complacent. Without adequate testing there are major flaws to this data display.

The fact is, the majority of the population is complacent.  While the small groups of panicked or those with healthy fear begin to hunker down the most are whistling Dixie.

Most of us will get it, and most of them will get it lightly.  The problem lies in the capacity of the healthcare system and the resilience of the doctors and nurses working there because they have been or are being overwhelmed where it has hit first.

With the six degrees of separation all of us have, it is not that far away.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 22, 2020, 12:45:02 AM
Here is an excerpt from an email that was circulated by a group of Boston Doctors.

Our Italian critical care colleagues have shared with us that they simply do not have enough resources (ventilators, physicians and nurses, critical care beds), and are forced to choose who lives and dies based on old tenets of wartime triage. Older patients do not even get a ventilator and die of their pneumonia. These are decisions nobody should have to face, and we are only 11 days behind Italy’s fate. Their hospitals are quite advanced, and we are no better in Boston. As doctors, we are desperately trying to prepare for the onslaught of patients in the coming weeks. It is already beginning.

This is the big worry.  That as the virus moves from initiation to acceleration that the hospitals will become overwhelmed.  The CDC updated their situation page yesterday and still have the US in the initiation phase https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/summary.html.  The acceleration phase is where the death rate would spike.  Lets hope that our last minute scramble for preparedness is enough to mitigate this.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Phils on March 22, 2020, 05:08:44 AM
US is not Italy.   Our critical care capacity is much higher on a populations basis.  We will also save a lot of lives from flu deaths due to all the "social isolation" measures in place.  We have to balance all this against the economic devastation current policies are creating......economic devastation also costs lives....maybe many many more over time than COVID will.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: tarquin on March 22, 2020, 05:35:27 AM
I hope for your sake and millions of other Americans you are right. By the looks of what's going on all over the world and the numbers I think it's not looking great.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 22, 2020, 06:05:07 AM
US is not Italy.   Our critical care capacity is much higher on a populations basis.  We will also save a lot of lives from flu deaths due to all the "social isolation" measures in place.  We have to balance all this against the economic devastation current policies are creating......economic devastation also costs lives....maybe many many more over time than COVID will.

Social isolation is really just starting.  Based on the numbers, we missed the window to avoid the first big spike in infections.  These infections have already happened.  Due to the long incubation period most of the infected are still non-symptomatic.  The real question would be how vigilant do we think the US was being 12 days ago.  The medical community is being vocal in saying that they do not believe they are prepared for the upcoming spike. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfinJ on March 22, 2020, 06:19:35 AM
US is not Italy.   Our critical care capacity is much higher on a populations basis.  We will also save a lot of lives from flu deaths due to all the "social isolation" measures in place.  We have to balance all this against the economic devastation current policies are creating......economic devastation also costs lives....maybe many many more over time than COVID will.
I have just seen many pictures of public spaces in Florida and New Orleans. No social isolation going there.

And more critical care per population in the US than Italy?  Whatever level Italy has, the latest news shows it is way too little.

And how will the economic devastation cost more lives then this pandemic?  Are we not already sufficiently rich to deal with a flatter economic world?  Would we rather reset the social/economic system, or cull the weak out of it?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 22, 2020, 11:46:50 AM
I was just on the phone with my brother and my Dad.  Pretty crazy the state of things right now in the medical world.

One of the biggest problems they were having in Scott's seven hospitals was testing.  They were unable to test due to a lack of tests so medical personnel were treating people with the virus unknowingly (and unprotected) and by the old guidelines this meant they could no longer work.  This had lead to a huge shortage of staff.  That rule has now changed so that exposed medical staff can work provided that they wear masks. 

He started his group working on their own test last month which actually just got full CLIA approval yesterday.  They have dedicated two of their robots to test production so by tomorrow they should be up to 1000 people tested a day.  They have made that info available so other groups can do the same and produce and test internally without sending out to labs.  That had also been a huge delay.  Originally all of the tests needed to go to the CDC itself.  Then they relaxed that rule so tests could be sent out to local labs.  Now they can do it in house.  That will help a lot with availability and turnaround time.  He said that the tests are actually two parts.  The swab kits which can go out in the field and the lab test itself.  There is actually a huge shortage of both.  The swab kit had a transport agent which was in very short supply which was previously required.  They just yesterday got them to allow transport samples in saline which should make that part of the test available. 

They are also very short on Masks and ventilators.  My brother's hospitals are 3D printing masks to try to get ahead of what they see coming. 

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: tarquin on March 22, 2020, 12:01:29 PM
Same as France. Not enough test kits and serious lack of medical equipment. Now the hospitals are over run.
 The WHO have been warning countries for months that this was going to be bad and prepare your hospitals etc.
 South Korea started mass producing test kits back in December. They are looking pretty good at the moment.
 Looks like France and Spain will extend and make stricter rules for the confinement.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 22, 2020, 12:07:54 PM
Goods News Report for the United States.  Daily infection TOTAL cases EXPLODED in the ITALY, GERMANY and now the UNITED STATES beyond CHINA’s DAILY PEAKS.  That is BAD!  But the DEATH RATES in the United States are still ~25% of the death rates recorded in ITALY, IRAN, CHINA, SPAIN, and FRANCE.

Let’s hope that better Behavior, Proximity and Physiology keep the death rates LOW in this COUNTRY and others that have changed their approach.  Pray for INFLECTION.

The United States continues to stay WELL BEHIND ITALY in death toll.  But the infection rate has caught up.  New York has turned into its own HOT ZONE.  More on that later.   
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 22, 2020, 12:08:19 PM
See this ranking of US States.  New York State should be on High Alert.  NY infections rates have pushed it beyond all but the top 5 most infected countries.  Distancing Behavior and Health Care both have to go into overdrive.
Death Rates are still a small fraction of ITALY.  ITALY’s death rate was 18X or 1800% higher than New York State as of 3/21/2020.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 22, 2020, 12:10:47 PM
Thanks for the update admin.  Info from the front lines is invaluable.  I revisited this forum because of your familial connections.   

More from Dr. Jha.

https://www.npr.org/2020/03/22/819725459/why-testing-can-slow-the-spread-of-the-coronavirus

Beasho, I'm curious why you never include a disclaimer with your charts - (the of lack of testing).
 
I've been following a youtube channel (for about a month) that has similar charts.  The data is all the same feed.  He's a PhD and always includes the caveat that the data is somewhat speculative due to lack of testing and political shenanigans.
 
He does a daily video report with a voice over, highlighting and explaining areas of the charts and graphs.
 
His predictions have been spot on.  When he started, all columns except China were in single digits. As he predicted, they inexorably marched into 2,3,4,5 and soon to be six digits.
 
But he always mentions the lack of testing on his data.  All the experts do.

I'm never sure what it is you are trying to forecast, if anything.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 22, 2020, 05:56:38 PM
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on March 22, 2020, 10:07:40 PM
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56

Found this very interesting (and scary). Thank you for posting.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on March 23, 2020, 07:51:42 AM
Only scary if you presume the federal government is incapable of responding competently. Oh. Wait...
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on March 23, 2020, 08:15:43 AM
The importance of not overwhelming critical care is obvious. Even in the healthiest, most resistant age groups the percentage of people requiring hospitalization is 5 percent or more. I think Italy's necessary triage is responsible for the much higher death rate. It seems completely obvious, especially since that's what their doctors are saying.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on March 23, 2020, 09:56:07 AM
My wife worked yesterday at the hospital. She a critical care nurse. This is a large trama hospital with three towers. The older single story wing of the hospital (which was the original hospital) has an old ICU and rooms in that are now used for out patient treatments. My wife said, "Good thing the hospital kept their license active for that old ICU" just in the event of a mass casualty. They have a few COVID-19 patients in ICU now. All potential COVID-19 patients are screened and directed to that part of the hospital. Regulations are being removed to a certain extent, and are a big part of the hold-up in getting supplies. The construction industry uses millions of N95 respirators. They are sold at all the construction supply warehouses. They are the same 3M N95 respirators /masks that the medical industry uses, except for the label that states "for medical use" which allows to charge a fortune for them. I know there is a liability that 3M bares in producing them for medical use. Trump mentioned in one of his public briefs that "they are working with 3M to waive the liability so they can produce more masks". I found that an interesting comment. An N95 respirator is and N95 respirator whether it's going to the hospital or Home Depot. I'm sure there are those who are still pumping the breaks so to speak, hanging on to their regulations.   
 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Phils on March 23, 2020, 10:51:58 AM
US is not Italy.   Our critical care capacity is much higher on a populations basis.  We will also save a lot of lives from flu deaths due to all the "social isolation" measures in place.  We have to balance all this against the economic devastation current policies are creating......economic devastation also costs lives....maybe many many more over time than COVID will.


And how will the economic devastation cost more lives then this pandemic?  Are we not already sufficiently rich to deal with a flatter economic world?  Would we rather reset the social/economic system, or cull the weak out of it?

Think about it a bit more deeply.  Read history.  See what life expectancy was 200 years ago, 100 years ago, 50 years ago.  Ask yourself how humans increased life expectancy so dramatically.  Think about all the future advances in cancer treatment, infectious disease treatment, management of global warming,  perinatal treatment, etc ,etc ,etc for the next many many years that will not occur if there is a no way to pay for it. Do you think this is the last pandemic that will occur?  How many lives will be lost to the next pandemic if the wealth of nations is completely destroyed?   Do you know anyone who was treated medically for a condition that was lethal 50 years ago but cured today?   How do you think that treatment was developed?  I am not against social isolation that is currently advocated but at some point, we cannot stop so much productive  human activity on this planet and not pay a massive price for it.  My point has to be considered.  At some point we need a more balanced approach.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on March 23, 2020, 11:52:41 AM
Beasho - I want to thank you for the time you have put into these charts. If I am ever in your area, I want to buy you a drink. I am a numbers junkie and can never get a good picture from the news reports as they seek to sensationalize as most people cannot read or understand charts. DATA is DATA. Anecdotal evidence has an emotional punch to it, but data is still just data.

This week is supposed to be the big one, where we see the largest exponential growth. I believe that American ingenuity has exponential growth as well, and am pretty sure we will have a stockpile in N95 masks by this weekend. 3M is not going to miss an opportunity for a windfall. Testing is ramping up quickly which will increase the number of cases as we will get many more of the asymptomatic cases identified. I would guess the death rate will decrease.

CDC has not changed their recommendations at all, but indicators are on Sunday we will have the next steps for quarantine. My hope is that it further restricts hot spots (city or county wide) and opens up areas where there is capacity for it. Mostly I want it to put pressure on local governments to look at the problem from both sides and have data driven plans, not politically driven plans.



Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on March 23, 2020, 02:08:04 PM
Beasho - I want to thank you for the time you have put into these charts. If I am ever in your area, I want to buy you a drink.

Mostly I want it to put pressure on local governments to look at the problem from both sides and have data driven plans, not politically driven plans.

I Second that. Thanks Beasho....

And SUP Leave, you're dream'n a little. No matter how much Black and White numbers you have, politic's will spin it into pure grey. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on March 23, 2020, 02:44:52 PM
^^ sadly I concur^^

I guess as a politician it is pretty hard to say "We are willing to start with 50k deaths and reverse engineer our response from there." Which is a likely scenario... but hard to say out loud. I am looking forward to hearing the criteria for success against CV19.

New York death rate dropped to less than 1% today it appears. Likely due to more testing, and more testing will continually decrease the death rate at least for a while. Then it should increase, while new cases decrease?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfinJ on March 24, 2020, 02:26:37 AM
US is not Italy.   Our critical care capacity is much higher on a populations basis.  We will also save a lot of lives from flu deaths due to all the "social isolation" measures in place.  We have to balance all this against the economic devastation current policies are creating......economic devastation also costs lives....maybe many many more over time than COVID will.


And how will the economic devastation cost more lives then this pandemic?  Are we not already sufficiently rich to deal with a flatter economic world?  Would we rather reset the social/economic system, or cull the weak out of it?

Think about it a bit more deeply.  Read history.  See what life expectancy was 200 years ago, 100 years ago, 50 years ago.  Ask yourself how humans increased life expectancy so dramatically.  Think about all the future advances in cancer treatment, infectious disease treatment, management of global warming,  perinatal treatment, etc ,etc ,etc for the next many many years that will not occur if there is a no way to pay for it. Do you think this is the last pandemic that will occur?  How many lives will be lost to the next pandemic if the wealth of nations is completely destroyed?   Do you know anyone who was treated medically for a condition that was lethal 50 years ago but cured today?   How do you think that treatment was developed?  I am not against social isolation that is currently advocated but at some point, we cannot stop so much productive  human activity on this planet and not pay a massive price for it.  My point has to be considered.  At some point we need a more balanced approach.

I agree with you.  This event is going to change the course of history. I have a daughter that after listening to me did the years of hard work in school and was about
to start work in a unique engineering position, durable materials for water sports products.  She was to start yesterday, and now???

My old industry, the airlines was being devastated before the drastique measures to effect.  I have many friends whose career is now over or majorly curtailed.

But to try the experiment of herd immunity in a country like Sweden with a modern and robots healthcare sysatem is very risky.  To follow this path in the US will be a
nightmare.  The condition of healthcare was at the outset inadequate.

Sadly the coming year will carry all sorts of pain. And picking it up and getting going again after will not be easy.  But humans are if anything resilient.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Fishman on March 24, 2020, 07:22:17 AM
Has anyone seen any data sources showing logarithmic scale charts, or "rate of doubling", instead of linear charts? 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 24, 2020, 11:44:21 AM
^Fishman: I follow a site that graphs it. but I won't link it here due to the highly opinionated overall theme.  If the line is what he claims, (?) it's as straight as a string. 



I’ve got a few days to go before I’ll be back to normal yet, I think. It was what if think of as a “moderate” level of incapacity. I had a couple of days of pneumonia in the middle when coughing up loads of thick green mucus which wasn’t great, but then back to the dry cough. Loads of other secondary symptoms too, sinus headaches, mouth ulcers, conjunctivitis etc. But I’ve felt worse with the flu before and my family seem to only get a very mild illness.

A friend of mine runs a biotech company and thinks that people will most likely have immunity for 6-12 months. Which might mean there will be another big outbreak in December(ish). But bear in mind that there are already different strains of this thing.  By next winter there will probably be many more. So it will all depend on how quickly and successfully vaccines can be made and distributed.

There’s been a bit of an “anti-science” or “anti-expert” vibe in British politics for a few years now. A growing trend. Well, that has certainly turned around now that life-and-death decisions have to be made based on information from people who actually know what they are talking about. So maybe some good will come of this.

Glad to hear you are on the mend.  Your biotech friend probably informed you of this already.  I thought I'd pass this on to the forum.  It has a phone app that may be interesting in the following days and weeks...   

https://youtu.be/q4P91VrfPGw
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Bean on March 25, 2020, 12:10:52 PM
Thanks for that update on Immunity - very positive message indeed.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on March 25, 2020, 01:55:29 PM
Useful video LaPerouse. I've been researching to topic of immunity, trying to understand the mechanisms better. Like so many things it's not as well understood as we might hope. the base mechanisms are fairly clear, but the control system, not so much. Given the substantial difference in outcome for infection even within a specific and similar cohort it seems likely that some people already have a substantial immunity. or at least a head start in acquiring one. We should have better tests in a few months to determine the immunity level and type. That will go a long way toward rationalizing the response. We can't all stay in our homes forever.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 25, 2020, 07:07:23 PM
^Fishman: I follow a site that graphs it. but I won't link it here due to the highly opinionated overall theme.  If the line is what he claims, (?) it's as straight as a string. 

Watched the video.  Long, complicated.  Summarized as follows:

“Reinfection is a rare thing and so in this case as in the SARS COV2 situation it seems as though if the virus follows what we would normally see that if there isn’t that much of a change in the virus hosts develop an immunity to it.”

Here --> https://youtu.be/q4P91VrfPGw?t=845


Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 25, 2020, 07:10:13 PM
Since you wanted Predictions: As of 3/25/20

•   Death rates have and will be much lower in the United States than in Italy.  Currently 1.5% vs 9.9%.  ITALY has been 660% more lethal than the United States (as of 3/25 WHO Data).
 
•   Death is correlated to CoMorbidity NOT TO AGE.  The Corona Virus does not kill randomly but kills those with pre-existing Cancer, Lung Disease, Heart Disease, Diabetes, Kidney problems (Google it)

•   Each Country and State will be measured differently and it will be a function of:

1)   Physiology – How old and CoMorbid are the citizens - Bloomberg News showed 99% of fatalities had pre-existing conditions (Google it)
2)   Behavior & Proximity – State or Country Behavioral response combined with density – Did the State Distance and Take Seriously?
 
3)   Health Care – How robust is the health care system?  Socialized medicine in Europe vs. Privatized in the United States will be measured and differentiated.  The better health care will limit death rates.  The more ICU beds the better the recovery.  Similar to the Ebola outbreak years ago.  Less than a handful of people died in the United States from a disease that was 50%+ lethal if left untreated.

USA Will break out with the highest number of cases in the world within the next 3 days.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 25, 2020, 07:38:19 PM
The following graph uses the DAYS to DOUBLE to project the number of CASES over the next week.

The WHITE line shows the historic forecast using this approach.  The BLUE Line shows the Actuals vs that Forecast.  You can see the PREDICTION was slightly below the Actuals for the United States.

ITALY (The second set of graphs) were in-line with this doubling rate.

Number of US CASES:
                                3/25 = 55,231
                                3/24 = 46,442
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 25, 2020, 07:44:44 PM
For Better or Worse that Doubling Rate has proven to be an effective FORECAST mechanism.  See the estimate from 1 week ago posted on Page 1. 
Estimate for 3/24 (7 days from 3/17) Was 43,898 vs. Actual 46,442. 

The White vs. Blue lines above are very compelling.

The good news is that the Countries HIGHLIGHTED in GREEN above: ITALY, IRAN and GERMANY have Days to Double >=10.  This is an implication that the curve is starting to flatten.   Unfortunately the US is in HIGH BURN mode. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 25, 2020, 07:51:11 PM
Testing Results by STATE.  New data needs to be vetted and cleaned up.  THERE is a HUGE disparity in POSITIVE Rates for Testing by State.  Especially in the State of Washington where fewer than 10% were positive in a State that has been BURNING the longest. 

What is going on ? ? ?

I did some quick correlations between metrics and the only interesting thing was the inverse correlation even if WEAK between POSITIVE TESTING RATES and Death Rate %.
 
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/COVID19Tracking/covid-tracking-data/master/data/states_daily_4pm_et.csv


Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 25, 2020, 07:57:26 PM
The United States INFECTION CASE RATE is NOW growing FASTER than most other developed nations.  Faster than Everyone but Holland, Spain and the UK.  Italy has SLOWED in number of new cases but Death Rates in ITALY are the Highest in the World.
See projections for Next 7 Days.  This is a combination of 1 WEEK HISTORY with 1 WEEK FORECAST.  It looks reasonable if not terrible.

Model is updated Daily.  Data sources keep moving.  They scrambled the STATE data which I am currently working to update.  I will also add in the TESTING metrics and FORECAST Sheets. 

Link here:
https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 25, 2020, 11:05:08 PM
https://www.sciencemag.org/coronavirus-research-commentary-and-news?intcmp=ghd_cov
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on March 26, 2020, 11:59:31 AM
Thank you Beasho!

My biz partner and I (both numbers guys) have spent a lot of time lately discussing this and have circled April 1 as the inflection point on case growth in America (number of new cases). Your provided charts hit pretty close to that as well. The next few days are going to see huge, scary spikes in cases.

The Imperial College study that predicted 2MM American and 500k British deaths is being revised. First by Oxford, and now by the guy who wrote it at Imperial College (Ferguson). Looks like he was too high on death rate, and too low on transmission rate. Thus creating less hospitalization than they thought.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/03/oxford-study-coronavirus-may-have-infected-half-of-u-k.html

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238578-uk-has-enough-intensive-care-units-for-coronavirus-expert-predicts/

UK has pulled CV19 off of the High Consequence Infections Disease list.

Antibody testing is going to become an even bigger deal than CV19 testing IMO. Go Science.




Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Dwight (DW) on March 26, 2020, 05:12:34 PM
https://www.instagram.com/p/B-NAx5EpQDd/?igshid=1id55fj7grllk
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: OkiWild on March 26, 2020, 08:49:03 PM
The point, of course, is to let acquired immunity grow without overwhelming medical facilities. That's the entire idea of flattening the curve. It's not to stop the infection, we don't have any tools available to do that. It's to be able to provide care to people who need it.

It blows my mind how many people still don't get this. People need to stop thinking of it as killing "old" people. A lot of young and otherwise healthy people are getting through it better, but many with medical intervention. If it comes off the rails...   
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 26, 2020, 10:31:34 PM
^Indeed.  The media is a train wreck.   

https://youtu.be/6KS5Fl6CId4?t=4530

As all the experts have been saying from day 1, without testing, we are guessing.  Nothing against models, but they could be so much better... 

From this next clip: "All models are incorrect, some are useful"

In construction, we have a saying, "a picture is worth a thousand words, a model is worth a million." 

To steal a phrase from the Editor of Science magazine.  "We are asking science to build an aircraft while it's flying, and they don't have a full set of blueprints." 

https://youtu.be/oMSY2ZG0nwo

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/25/opinion/coronavirus-trump-reopen-america.html
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: tarquin on March 27, 2020, 03:53:08 AM
Beasho amazing work. Maybe a little over complicated though. Here is one I found on another site that I like. Easy to read and the message is clear.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 27, 2020, 04:46:05 AM
The Imperial College study that predicted 2MM American and 500k British deaths is being revised. First by Oxford, and now by the guy who wrote it at Imperial College (Ferguson). Looks like he was too high on death rate, and too low on transmission rate. Thus creating less hospitalization than they thought.

Here are Ferguson's comments on that:

https://twitter.com/neil_ferguson?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1243294815200124928&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationalreview.com%2Fcorner%2Fcoronavirus-pandemic-neil-ferguson-did-not-walk-back-covid-19-predictions%2F

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).
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfinJ on March 27, 2020, 06:54:55 AM
But it is still just a guess, huh. First teen died here today. Kids as young as 10 on respirators.

Beasho amazing work. Maybe a little over complicated though. Here is one I found on another site that I like. Easy to read and the message is clear.
^Indeed.  The media is a train wreck.   

https://youtu.be/6KS5Fl6CId4?t=4530

As all the experts have been saying from day 1, without testing, we are guessing.  Nothing against models, but they could be so much better... 

From this next clip: "All models are incorrect, some are useful"

In construction, we have a saying, "a picture is worth a thousand words, a model is worth a million." 

To steal a phrase from the Editor of Science magazine.  "We are asking science to build an aircraft while it's flying, and they don't have a full set of blueprints." 

https://youtu.be/oMSY2ZG0nwo

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/25/opinion/coronavirus-trump-reopen-america.html

What must it be like to be my daughter’s diabetic boyfriend, my 90yo neighbor....... to hear this line of thought?

The point, of course, is to let acquired immunity grow without overwhelming medical facilities. That's the entire idea of flattening the curve. It's not to stop the infection, we don't have any tools available to do that. It's to be able to provide care to people who need it.

It blows my mind how many people still don't get this. People need to stop thinking of it as killing "old" people. A lot of young and otherwise healthy people are getting through it better, but many with medical intervention. If it comes off the rails...   

I think there are still many unknowns in play.   

It is starting to hit my home town NY in earnest, everyone fighting a terrible battle badly supported.

Here the French military with flights and field hospitals has started moving patients around to spread the impact on the healthcare systems.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on March 27, 2020, 10:20:20 AM
The Imperial College study that predicted 2MM American and 500k British deaths is being revised. First by Oxford, and now by the guy who wrote it at Imperial College (Ferguson). Looks like he was too high on death rate, and too low on transmission rate. Thus creating less hospitalization than they thought.

Here are Ferguson's comments on that:

https://twitter.com/neil_ferguson?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1243294815200124928&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationalreview.com%2Fcorner%2Fcoronavirus-pandemic-neil-ferguson-did-not-walk-back-covid-19-predictions%2F

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).

Yeah, they revised their study. The point being that 500k was the number they determined if no social distancing was taken, but revised it down to 20k based on the interventions taken. Actually, with a higher transmission rate they should have given higher than 500k (with their lethality rates) at the outset.

Dr. Birx spoke of this revision on TV last night and now 90% of America assumes she is Trump and Putin's puppet. You can see that she is trying to correlate the data they are receiving from actual testing with the models and she showed some optimism. This is not allowed.

It is pretty clear now that China's numbers are false or under reported. To my untrained eye, population density is the most important factor in cases and there is 1.4 billion chinese people.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 27, 2020, 10:56:22 AM
But it is still just a guess, huh. First teen died here today. Kids as young as 10 on respirators.

Reporting 1 DEATH among 16,108 deaths in EUROPE among 285,833 CASES in Europe is a form of SENSATIONALISM and TERRORIZING the public. 

EVERY data source has suggested Co-Morbidity accounts for 90%++++ of the deaths.  If this were the FLU with a Mortality rate of 0.1% as applied to 285K POSITIVE CASES there would be 285 people dead.  There are probably 100X to 200X this number dead from the FLU this season in Europe.  Assuming Ages 1 - 20 represent 20% of the population would result in 57 people dead from a COMMON FLU INFECTION among 'Teens'.

Corona Virus fatality among teens is a RED HERRING to sell media space.

See the following Statistics for EUROPE

Quote from the Article here:
"The teen is the youngest known to have died in Europe from the devastating spread of the novel coronavirus, according to the Evening Standard."

Link: https://nypost.com/2020/03/27/french-teen-is-youngest-known-to-die-from-coronavirus-in-europe/

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfinJ on March 27, 2020, 12:31:11 PM
I am sorry for terrorizing you. She was healthy, no known weakness.  This the contrary story to what is being told. 

You want me to post all the data I see here?  You want to hear all the numbers?

Are you than not terrorized?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 27, 2020, 01:15:53 PM
No need to hear the data.  I have been providing this link with all the details for the past week and a half.

This is the World Health Organization data taken from table form and converted into Graphics.  525,00 Worldwide cases.  With the US topping the list for CASES.  The US is 6th on the list for deaths:

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Thatspec on March 27, 2020, 01:22:17 PM
The most likely scenario, this 16 year old did in fact have one or more unknown contributing factors BECAUSE she died as a result of catching covid-19. We have enough information to say that with some certainty given the available data. I wouldn't even open an article from the NYpost.
Yes I have way too much time on my hands...
Beasho, thanks for taking the time to compile all of this!
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 27, 2020, 01:34:06 PM
Here is a PDF output of the link from above.  I am testing to see if it attaches to the ZONE post.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 27, 2020, 02:09:21 PM
https://www.sciencefriday.com/segments/citizen-science-covid-19/

https://www.covidnearyou.org/#!/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on March 27, 2020, 06:51:44 PM
Bears some resemblance:)  Our South Orange County beaches are still open but no State Park or Harbor parking. We are all going a little stir crazy.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on March 27, 2020, 07:03:22 PM
It definitely seems like areas where everyone relies on public transit, subways and trains are the hardest hit. Not to mention tall enclosed buildings with common elevators or even stairs as the only access. We don't have sidewalks through most of our neighborhood. We just walk out in the street. Urban sprawl. There are almost no cars. It's easy to stay clear of anyone and yet walk for miles, as long as I don't walk down the hill to the beach. That's a different story. Everyone in Los Angeles feels a need to drive to the beach.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on March 28, 2020, 08:32:27 AM
What also matters is how draconian the separation and quarantine actions are, and how the population reacts. There are countless videos on how the Chinese reacted--roadblocks, arresting people (I wonder what the heck they do with them), locking people into their houses. In India the police beat the shit out of violaters. I can't see the USA doing much of that.

I read a lot of media, including extreme stuff on both ends of the USA political spectrum. I don't recommend that to anyone who wants to retain a respect for humanity--both ends are disgusting. I'm watching the drumbeat to discredit Dr. Fauci on the far right. It's a weird thing to see, it feels like the kind of shit the soviets used to do when someone in the power structure didn't behave. I don't even begin to understand the American public.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 28, 2020, 08:46:09 AM
I was listening to Andrew Cuomo who refused to be baited into politics.  He kept pulling it back to the numbers that he is working with.  One issue which he kept returning to is how long patients are staying on ventilators.  Weeks is the norm.  1 to 2 weeks being most common but he mentioned 3 weeks becoming regular.  This is the sickest group and many of these people eventually dying.  This cumulative effect is what overwhelms the hospitals and why the death rates can soar even after the increase in case number has begun to decrease.  He said that his data is indicating 140,000 hospitalized in NY alone peaking in 2-3 weeks (currently at 5300).  Those are shocking #'s even in a time of shocking #'s.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Hail SUPin on March 28, 2020, 09:11:02 AM
I read a lot of media, including extreme stuff on both ends of the USA political spectrum. I don't recommend that to anyone who wants to retain a respect for humanity--both ends are disgusting. I'm watching the drumbeat to discredit Dr. Fauci on the far right. It's a weird thing to see, it feels like the kind of shit the soviets used to do when someone in the power structure didn't behave. I don't even begin to understand the American public.

I had a conversation with a coworker last night who thinks the media is making the virus sound much worse than it is to make Trump look bad. WTF?! I didn’t know the media had so many resources. The ability for the media to completely disrupt the global economy, continue to allow the virus to spread from country to country, and allow the death toll to keep climbing all in an attempt to make one man look bad is preposterous.

I find it disturbing people dismiss the amount of deaths in the US. If a terrorist attack claimed this many lives the armed forces recruiting office would be overrun with people ready to go to war. It’s sad we have thousands of people dying everyday and people still can’t take off their political goggles and react with some compassion and rational behavior.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Thatspec on March 28, 2020, 09:15:09 AM
How long before we start in this direction? :o
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/03/27/822440615/supporters-of-brazils-bolsonaro-call-for-protests-against-coronavirus-lockdown
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfcowboy on March 28, 2020, 09:50:33 AM
First, thanks Beasho. This is pretty solid and although I’m not the best numbers wonk, I have a pretty solid track record with trend analysis in my biz and I agree with your peak date estimate. (I picked it for later next week but the average will win, which I didn’t take into account.)

2 thoughts. The data sources would need an insane amount of collusion between completely disparate agencies to pull off faking these numbers.

Second, I work in “The Média” and while there is bias, it’s mostly like your jobs. A bunch of people trying to pull shit off with mixed results. As a business owner I can’t even get my team to turn in timesheets half the time, let alone pull off a global scam. The bias that exists is normally a few producers or writers and they get to do just enough to not get fired and in true journalism (make your own call as to what constitutes that) if you can’t make up a convincing fairy tale to back you stuff, you get to go home.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on March 28, 2020, 10:38:25 AM
First, thanks Beasho. This is pretty solid and although I’m not the best numbers wonk, I have a pretty solid track record with trend analysis in my biz and I agree with your peak date estimate. (I picked it for later next week but the average will win, which I didn’t take into account.)

2 thoughts. The data sources would need an insane amount of collusion between completely disparate agencies to pull off faking these numbers.

Second, I work in “The Média” and while there is bias, it’s mostly like your jobs. A bunch of people trying to pull shit off with mixed results. As a business owner I can’t even get my team to turn in timesheets half the time, let alone pull off a global scam. The bias that exists is normally a few producers or writers and they get to do just enough to not get fired and in true journalism (make your own call as to what constitutes that) if you can’t make up a convincing fairy tale to back you stuff, you get to go home.

Great post.  Conspiracy theories are a reflection on the person spouting the theory. For any of these vast conspiracies to work would require extremely talented leadership and smart, hard - working people. If you spend any time in the real world you realize that media is just another job. Bias sells right now but luckily we can still find the real numbers and break them down for ourselves.

Human nature never changes. Internet personas and virtue signaling look much different in real life daylight. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 28, 2020, 11:27:33 AM
Positive Thoughts are Tough to find hunting through the data but THE UNITED STATES IS NOT ITALY (This is what I have for Today).

IF the UNITED STATES were ITALY we would have ~ 49,411 DEAD.  The US has 1,700 dead or 30X lower.
The Deaths per 100K in ITALY is JUST BELOW the Number of People that DIED from INFLUENZA in the UNITED STATES 2 years ago. 

PLEASE INTERNALIZE THIS.  2 Years ago 17.1 People Died per 100K of the FLU in the US.

The CUMULATIVE death rate in the US stays low at 1.6%.  Latest Death Rate 2.2% from yesterday. 

Bad News:  The United States is Winning with more Cases in the US than any other Country.  Expect to see 300,000 CASES in the US within the next 7 days.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 28, 2020, 11:28:42 AM
PDF Print out of Model attached.

I am getting the On-Line version updated with this latest Model.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 28, 2020, 12:02:02 PM
From a high school friend who is now a Doctor:

"Stories from the front line are alarming but represent only a fraction of cases. The unknown seems to be why some are minimally symptomatic and why some go into respiratory failure (even healthy people). Hot zone statistics seem to suggest 81% get mild symptoms, 15% get pretty sick and may wind up in the hospital with supplemental oxygen but survive. 4% become critical and of those the death rate is is 70-80%. In other words, if you wind up on a ventilator you better have your affairs already in order. This is the story out of Seattle and NOLA anyway."

--> 4% X 70% = 3.2% Death Rate (now I am running numbers).  This is HIGHER than reported but within the realm of believably.

Takeaway:  YOU DO NOT WANT TO BE ON A VENTILATOR
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfcowboy on March 28, 2020, 12:14:15 PM
First, thanks Beasho. This is pretty solid and although I’m not the best numbers wonk, I have a pretty solid track record with trend analysis in my biz and I agree with your peak date estimate. (I picked it for later next week but the average will win, which I didn’t take into account.)

2 thoughts. The data sources would need an insane amount of collusion between completely disparate agencies to pull off faking these numbers.

Second, I work in “The Média” and while there is bias, it’s mostly like your jobs. A bunch of people trying to pull shit off with mixed results. As a business owner I can’t even get my team to turn in timesheets half the time, let alone pull off a global scam. The bias that exists is normally a few producers or writers and they get to do just enough to not get fired and in true journalism (make your own call as to what constitutes that) if you can’t make up a convincing fairy tale to back you stuff, you get to go home.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: tarquin on March 28, 2020, 12:31:31 PM
Yes you only have to look at what's been going on in Italy, Spain,France and all the other countries. People get put on ventilators for  weeks on end. Then dont normally make it. This is one of the many reasons it's so hard on the hospitals and staff.
 These people are doing an amazing job and all deserve medals as far as I'm concerned. So anything we can do to help them should be done. What ever country you are in.
 Make masks etc. But it looks like stay home and try to slow the spread is the best option now that govts all over the world have been too slow to react.
 Look at the positive side. We can make a difference environmentally. In a very short time.Something to think about.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 29, 2020, 02:28:57 AM
Has anyone seen any data sources showing logarithmic scale charts, or "rate of doubling", instead of linear charts?

Hi Fishman,

I saw that Johns Hopkins added a Logarithmic tab to their chart (bottom right): https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 29, 2020, 11:29:37 AM
No log scale on this one yet, but it zooms in to counties. 

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/26/covid-19-tracker/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 29, 2020, 11:40:49 AM
Report for the day.  United States Fatality is LOW.

In Line with Germany and Japan.  Korea has spiked.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 30, 2020, 04:47:14 AM
Watching Dr. Fauci (and Dr. Birx) estimate 100,000 to 200,000 deaths in the US in yesterday's briefing was disorienting (the whole briefing was bizarre). 

"Whenever the models come in, they give a worst-case scenario and a best-case scenario. Generally, the reality is somewhere in the middle. I've never seen a model of the diseases that I've dealt with where the worst case actually came out. They always overshoot.  I mean, looking at what we're seeing now, you know, I would say between 100 and 200,000 (deaths). But I don't want to be held to that," he said, adding that the US is going to have "millions of cases."

He is seeing a peak in deaths in 2-3 weeks.  If correct, those would be death numbers in the range of our current infected numbers.  A commentator mentioned this being like thirty to sixty 911 events. Trump is now saying that 100,000 deaths would be a great success and based on a warning he was given (2.2 Million dead) he extended social distancing measures to April 30.

Here is a good article: https://www.ft.com/content/f3796baf-e4f0-4862-8887-d09c7f706553

John Ioannidis, a professor of epidemiology at Stanford University, has branded the data we have about the epidemic “utterly unreliable”.  “We don’t know if we are failing to capture infections by a factor of three or 300,” he wrote last week. If thousands more people are surviving than we know about, then current mortality rate estimates are too high — perhaps by a large margin.

Researchers at the University of Hong Kong have estimated that, in Wuhan, where the pandemic began, the likely death rate was 1.4 per cent — much lower than the previous estimate of 4.5 per cent, which was calculated using official statistics on the region’s cases and deaths.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 30, 2020, 08:43:10 AM
Watching Dr. Fauci (and Dr. Birx) estimate 100,000 to 200,000 deaths in the US in yesterday's briefing was disorienting (the whole briefing was bizarre). . . .

He is seeing a peak in deaths in 2-3 weeks.  If correct, those would be death numbers in the range of our current infected numbers.  A commentator mentioned this being like thirty to sixty 911 events. Trump is now saying that 100,000 deaths would be a great success and based on a warning he was given (2.2 Million dead) he extended social distancing measures to April 30. . . .

Researchers at the University of Hong Kong have estimated that, in Wuhan, where the pandemic began, the likely death rate was 1.4 per cent — much lower than the previous estimate of 4.5 per cent, which was calculated using official statistics on the region’s cases and deaths.[/b]

I am estimating numbers BELOW Fauci.  This model shows 82,000 Deaths in the United States but requires the Exponential Growth of Cases Positive Cases to Reach 4.7 Million in the United States.

It will not.  There is not enough Dry Powder in the Keg due to
1) CHANGE in Social Behavior and
2) Death Rates are likely LOWER than currently recorded because of Many, Many more benign infections than we are currently measuring per the Wuhan data above. 

My Conclusion:The death rate in the US is likely to be BELOW 82,000.

Days to Double in the US has INCREASED to 5.6.  Italy the United States and the Remainder of Europe reported FEWER cases yesterday than the day before.  Looks like a top but still too early to call it.

Full output attached as PDF:
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 30, 2020, 08:52:26 AM
With regards to Comorbidity Corona Virus may just be accelerating the leading causes of Death in the United States. 

This model shows what 82,000 deaths would look like IF the COVID-19 numbers simply displaced the HIGH Risk causes of Death from 2017. 

It would result in a 5% drop in the leading causes with NO NET CHANGE in Total Deaths.

Here is an article suggesting that Deaths as measured in TOTAL Numbers are in FACT DOWN Across all age groups.  Lets hope it not FAKE news.  Could it be possible:

WILL MORE PEOPLE WILL SURVIVE THIS YEAR THAN IN PAST YEARS BECAUSE OF THE CORONA VIRUS?

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2y2gvh2q7axdzz2/COVID-19_UnintendedConsequences.pdf?dl=0&fbclid=IwAR3eHyr0bLrB0zQBmol11P7_xrDJRhXRYz5oLaT3o7jGGbgusYMs12SxvHw
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 30, 2020, 09:12:33 AM
Of note: the CDC just moved the USA as a whole from the initiation phase to the acceleration phase on the 26th noting that much of the country is still in the initiation phase.  At this point we have to believe that they have working estimates to adjust for the failure to sufficiently test and for the huge variances in testing by location and over time.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on March 30, 2020, 09:30:59 AM
OK - Plan for Denominator to GO UP!

Can we assume Death Count is more Solid?  Aka not a bunch of hidden bodies somewhere.

US Profile ONLY. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on March 30, 2020, 09:32:50 AM
Actually, you never want to be on a ventilator in any case. My daughter is a Respiratory Therapist, and during one of our conversations early in the outbreak, she said she heard that caregivers in Italy were putting people on ventilators when their O2 level dropped beyond a certain point. She was outraged, she said something like: "you put a ventilator tube in someone's lung and you just took 20 percent of their lifespan away. A lot of people are never the same. We view it as a last-ditch effort." I'm sure she's realized now that the people they're putting on ventilators are at the last-ditch.

The April 30th date is probably a good one. Most of the predictive models I've seen for the effect of shelter in place show a peak at around April 21. The peak for Oregon is estimated on April 24.

One of the new problems with testing is that the most intensive testing is happening in places that are already a hot spot. What pretty much everyone expected--that testing only sick people vastly under-reports the infection rate--is obviously true. The huge jump in infected people in New York is probably as much an artifact of greatly increased general testing as it is an indication of infection growth. Increased testing in areas not identified as hot spots would enable those infection loci that are under the radar to be detected and appropriate action taken. Then again, the large number of infections reported in New York will probably get people to comply more with social distancing requirement. New Yorkers are notoriously hard to push to comply with anything.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on March 30, 2020, 09:51:34 AM
Yes, there have been a group of interesting JAMA articles about this.  This one was about Italy.  With a mid-stream change in testing protocol the case fatality rate jumped from 3.1 to 7.2%.  Equally interesting is the large variances in start dates which of course determines the significance of death count.  https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2763667

After an initial, extensive testing strategy of both symptomatic and asymptomatic contacts of infected patients in a very early phase of the epidemic, on February 25, the Italian Ministry of Health issued more stringent testing policies. This recommendation prioritized testing for patients with more severe clinical symptoms who were suspected of having COVID-19 and required hospitalization. Testing was limited for asymptomatic people or those who had limited, mild symptoms. This testing strategy resulted in a high proportion of positive results, ie, 19.3% (positive cases, 21 157 of 109 170 tested as of March 14, 2020), and an apparent increase in the case-fatality rate because patients who presented with less severe clinical disease (and therefore with lower fatality rate) were no longer tested (case-fatality rate changed from 3.1% on February 24 to 7.2% on March 17). These more mild cases, with low fatality rate, were thus no longer counted in the denominator.

On the basis of the number of cases and of the advanced stage of the disease it was hypothesized that the virus had been circulating within the population since January.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on March 30, 2020, 11:18:48 AM
Beasho, thanks again. I can't tell you how much I value your math on this thread.

As just an observer of the human condition, this outbreak is fascinating. I have friends and virtual friends social media who will not (or cannot) allow themselves to look at this virus objectively. Everything is viewed emotionally. It is almost like people *enjoy* staying at home and virtue signalling about how good they are at social distancing. I'm crawling out of my skin being restricted from outdoor activities. I have almost worn through my golf net. I broke my mtn bike on Saturday.

If statistics tell us anything it is that the number one cause of dying from CV-19 is the number one cause of dying any other time. Being old and/or unhealthy wins every time. Sure there are going to be outliers, just like in every day life. In the WA state statistics as of Friday we have 195 total deaths, 58% of which are 80+ years old. Is CV something to fear more than heart disease?

The biggest take away from this, when it is all over is that we should dedicate far more time to our health and our families' health than anything else. Living in fear of a virus while sitting on your ass eating foods with HFCS and complex carbohydrates is simply bewildering.

I certainly have been giving Dad lectures to my girls about it (captive audience). They will likely have ocular issues moving ahead with the number of eye rolls they have given me these past weeks.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on March 31, 2020, 02:40:43 PM
https://youtu.be/caaY-NixY3s
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SaMoSUP on April 01, 2020, 12:55:22 PM
All this covid-19 forecasting reminds me of how experts try to predict the stock market. The Dow Jones or S&P is gonna peak at (insert number) by (insert date). Dr. Fauci and team may or may not be any better than Jerome Powell and all the so called financial experts at predicting their respective subject matter.

Maybe they should have stock market experts have a go at covid-19 forecasting. Or if Dr. Fauci and team get it right, they should try their hand at the stock market next.

This is what I'm tracking these days since stay at home in CA.



Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 01, 2020, 01:16:26 PM
All this covid-19 forecasting reminds me of how experts try to predict the stock market. The Dow Jones or S&P is gonna peak at (insert number) by (insert date)....

Sweet curves.  The inflections should happen at the same time.

Meanwhile.  More data supporting CoMorbidity and Corona's relationship with the common Influenza.  Maybe the angry red headed step kid to the Flu.

Article from Zero Hedge.  It takes people with Pre-Existing Conditions for the Corona Virus to propagate.  There are only so many people in a given population.

“Italy's mild flu season left a larger victim pool for COVID-19. This would suggest that the US, which has struggled with more lethal flu seasons, won't have as large a pool of potential high-risk victims, especially as testing suggests the virus is more widespread than many had expected.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/whats-behind-italys-outrageous-10-mortality-rate-covid-19
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 01, 2020, 01:19:38 PM
Latest observations:

Italy has topped out.  The maximum number of new cases was 10 days ago on March 22nd @   The US is in a high burn phase.  1 Week Forecast stands at 460,000 CASES in the United States.

Italy’s death rate was greater than 20% for the past 2 days.  The US death rate was up to its highest level of 3.6%.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 01, 2020, 01:20:44 PM
Live INTERACTIVE Model here:

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9

Full PDF Attached below.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on April 01, 2020, 05:03:40 PM
Thanks again Beasho. I look forward (with one eye open) to your daily reports. The most trusted source.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 02, 2020, 07:00:06 AM
I have been screaming about CoMorbidity since I saw the statistics 3 weeks ago out of China then confirmed by Bloomberg in Italy and the data from Imperial College.  All 100% aligned on the risk to PRIOR HEALTH CONDITIONS.

Then on Sunday 60 Minutes was reporting and the doctor said "We see a high correlation with Obesity."  BMI > than 40 is listed as Morbid Obesity.  And there it was the word again.

Reuters just published this article on the higher death rates in Louisiana "We're just sicker."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-new-orleans/why-is-new-orleans-coronavirus-death-rate-seven-times-new-yorks-obesity-is-a-factor-idUSKBN21K1B0
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: ninja tuna on April 02, 2020, 08:03:50 AM
I have read an article or two about Italy having a higher death rate. Now I am trying to paraphrase one or 2 of a ton of articles I have read so I may be screwing this up a little. But it was discussed that Italy also had a good health care system that has allowed an older population thus making them more fragile. The articles basically said Italy just had a lot of old people and these old people may have been died of other things attributed to C19 or C19 was just the straw that broke the camels back.

Great updates Beasho.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: robon on April 02, 2020, 08:20:59 AM
I have read an article or two about Italy having a higher death rate. Now I am trying to paraphrase one or 2 of a ton of articles I have read so I may be screwing this up a little. But it was discussed that Italy also had a good health care system that has allowed an older population thus making them more fragile. The articles basically said Italy just had a lot of old people and these old people may have been died of other things attributed to C19 or C19 was just the straw that broke the camels back.

Great updates Beasho.

It’s all interesting data. There are many variables to consider, with social economic status-social determinants of health, population density, and culture being several, along with response from governments.  Some countries such as Italy may have multiple generations living together and many adult Italians, a third or more, live with their parents. So, elderly people are more at risk of exposure in a country such as Italy, where it’s much more common culturally for the elderly to be at home with their families and interspersed in the general public day to day, as compared to North America. Throw in population density factors, in a very small country and it’s a recipe for disaster.

I’m a former EMT and now a social worker, so it’s pretty interesting to me to see these variables and issues being brought to forefront.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Thatspec on April 02, 2020, 08:25:16 AM
It would be interesting to see how many of the comorbidity C19 deaths would have occurred anyway from other causes in 2020 (based on prior years data). The fear mongers want us to believe it's 1918, the naysayers the opposite. As is always the case, the truth will be somewhere in the middle ::)
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 02, 2020, 08:38:11 AM
I have seen a couple of graphs showing year over year United States total death rates by month. I can't find it now though.

We are currently falling through the floor on our national death rate. No one is allowed to live and so no one is dying (car crashes, general accidents, etc). So we are doing a good job of saving unhealthy people from CV-19.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Thatspec on April 02, 2020, 09:01:11 AM
Interesting Economist article from yesterday quoting another Imperial College of London study.

As we all knew but nice to see it studied, kinda drops the death rate a bit. Basically they're saying there are a minimum of 21x the number of confirmed cases currently active.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/01/covid-19-may-be-far-more-prevalent-than-previously-thought
You'd have to subscribe so posted the important paragraph below.

"The results suggest the virus is far more prevalent than official case counts would suggest. Across the 11 European countries studied, official government statistics indicate that there are 319,500 confirmed cases, affecting less than 0.1% of the population. The Imperial researchers peg the more likely figure at 18.5m cases (with a confidence interval of between 7m and 43m), which suggests that, as of March 28th, 5% of the population in these countries have contracted the virus.

This high infection rate is partly because of the highly contagious nature of the virus. The epidemiologists estimated the “basic reproduction number” of covid-19 to be 3.9, meaning that in a population where no one is immune, and no precautions are taken to control the outbreak, each infected individual passes on the virus to nearly four other people. By implementing “non-pharmaceutical interventions”—such as school closures, the banning of public events and nationwide lockdowns—governments have successfully reduced this reproduction number. Once it drops below one, the number of new infections starts to fall.

The researchers estimate that timely interventions over the past month have reduced the reproduction number of the virus across the 11 countries studied by two-thirds to 1.4, thus saving between 21,000 and 120,000 lives. In Italy, alone, interventions have prevented some 38,000 deaths, according to the researchers. The past few weeks have been tough for those hit by the crisis. They can take some solace in knowing that it could have been much worse."
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Dwight (DW) on April 02, 2020, 09:37:25 AM
Obesity usually means high blood pressure, with so many people taking drugs for that, and one of those drugs acting like it super charges the virus.....

It sure would be nice to know if all those deaths claiming no health issues, were actually taking BP meds.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 02, 2020, 10:39:39 AM
https://youtu.be/wUw43-j047k

https://twitter.com/i/status/1245628121681809409
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 02, 2020, 12:56:53 PM
It would be interesting to see how many of the comorbidity C19 deaths would have occurred anyway from other causes in 2020 (based on prior years data). The fear mongers want us to believe it's 1918, the naysayers the opposite. As is always the case, the truth will be somewhere in the middle ::)

Here is that View.  2017 Death Data for the United States. 

I am estimating 82,000 deaths from Corona and how that would look if SLID into the profile from ~2 years ago.  This model assumes

--> NO NET INCREASE IN DEATH

In other words Corona just takes the place of the other CoMorbidities for the Year. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Thatspec on April 02, 2020, 01:08:17 PM
Oops, looks like back a page you'd already looked at it that way but thanks for re-posting :)
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 03, 2020, 04:58:50 AM
This site has an unbelievable set of interactive charts.  https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus I am unsure if it was posted before (if so apologies) but it is well worth a look.  You can change from log to linear, add or remove countries and advance the charts over time.  Or restrict them by time ranges. 

In this one they are looking just at deaths over time using days since the 5th total confirmed death. 

I saw a briefing with Andrew Cuomo last night saying that with full measures adhered to his numbers are showing 16,000 projected deaths for NY state.  Population of 20 M. (800 deaths per million).   He also said that he believed that the actual number which Dr Fauci had given the president was 94,000 deaths nationally if all measures were strictly adhered to nationally (all states).  With a population of 330 Million in the US that is 284 deaths per million people.    For reference Spain is currently at 190 deaths per million and Italy is at 220 deaths per million, New York is currently at 150 deaths per million.



Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 03, 2020, 07:45:44 AM
It would be interesting to see how many of the comorbidity C19 deaths would have occurred anyway from other causes in 2020 (based on prior years data). The fear mongers want us to believe it's 1918, the naysayers the opposite. As is always the case, the truth will be somewhere in the middle ::)

Here is that View.  2017 Death Data for the United States. 

I am estimating 82,000 deaths from Corona and how that would look if SLID into the profile from ~2 years ago.  This model assumes

--> NO NET INCREASE IN DEATH

In other words Corona just takes the place of the other CoMorbidities for the Year.

This is a really interesting chart and is something I have been telling everyone I have come into contact with. Even if we hit Fauci's 120k deaths, we are looking at a benign year as far as death tolls go.

The problem with your chart is that the accident rate is dropping immensely due to the stay at home order for huge population areas. This is likely to be one of the safest years on record. Hospitals that ramped up to prepare for CV19 in rural areas, have had to send people home because there has not been anything to do. Our local small hospital is usually busy but they are hitting the realization that their revenue in March and April is tanking, and they are about to do a layoff - unless they can get in on some CV -19 relief.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 03, 2020, 08:44:54 AM
It would be interesting to see how many of the comorbidity C19 deaths would have occurred anyway from other causes in 2020 (based on prior years data). The fear mongers want us to believe it's 1918, the naysayers the opposite. As is always the case, the truth will be somewhere in the middle ::)

Here is that View.  2017 Death Data for the United States. 

I am estimating 82,000 deaths from Corona and how that would look if SLID into the profile from ~2 years ago.  This model assumes

--> NO NET INCREASE IN DEATH

In other words Corona just takes the place of the other CoMorbidities for the Year.

(https://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=35836.0;attach=105160;image)

I don't quite understand what you did.  I see the 2017 #'s come from here https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm .  I get that 82,000 is your estimated US Corona deaths but where are you getting the other figures in that column on your chart?  An estimate of 2020?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on April 03, 2020, 09:51:16 AM
Traffic accident death rate since Stay at Home order in California. UC Davis study. It's about 50% drop.
 https://roadecology.ucdavis.edu/files/content/projects/COVID_CHIPs_Impacts.pdf
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on April 03, 2020, 10:38:02 AM
Here's a great little explanation of the how the COVID-19 works by a Yale professor.

https://covid.yale.edu/media-player/4989/?utm_source=YaleToday&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=YT_YaleNews%20-%20Alumni%20From%20Peoplehub_4-3-2020
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfinJ on April 03, 2020, 10:50:03 AM
Sorry to jump back in but the high side estimates plus follow on corona related deaths and we are talking 2,000,000.

My buddy just recovered after a 2 week fight in NY. No hospital admittance since he could still breath. He went 5 times. No testing either.

He is 59, non smoker, occasional drinker and no other comormidity factors.

Some days he thought he was going to die.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: ninja tuna on April 03, 2020, 12:04:15 PM
I thought the guy that came out with the model about the 2 million came out last week and said that he was wrong. And wrong by a factor of 25.  His 2.2 million number should have been about 88,000.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 03, 2020, 12:22:57 PM
I thought the guy that came out with the model about the 2 million came out last week and said that he was wrong. And wrong by a factor of 25.  His 2.2 million number should have been about 88,000.

You can read his comments on that and much more in his feed below.  Essentially, he (and all other epidemiologists) suggested social distancing, which they instructed would reduce the spread of the disease and reduce the eventual death count.  As that occurs (or doesn't) the estimates will need to continually be adjusted. 

As a side note, he tested positive for Coronavirus on the 19th.

https://twitter.com/neil_ferguson/status/1243294815200124928
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 03, 2020, 05:37:43 PM
This site has an unbelievable set of interactive charts.  https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus I am unsure if it was posted before (if so apologies) but it is well worth a look.  You can change from log to linear, add or remove countries and advance the charts over time.  Or restrict them by time ranges.

You guys are killing me.  Do you realize that every model I have published has been INTERACTIVE with all 180 countries.  Click around you can select countries.  Select All.  Sort the Data Tabel . . . . .  It is all pulled from the same data but I have organized it 'differently.'

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 03, 2020, 05:39:26 PM
Click on Forecast.  Hit the Clear All Button. 

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 03, 2020, 05:46:59 PM
I added a new view (not yet published).  Heat map vs. Time. This shows the Days to Double and how things are improving Country by Country.

Green Better RED Bad.  Sorted by Today Worst to Best.

Japan Heated back up.  Canada at the TOP of the list.  These are Countries in their greatest GROWTH phase. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 03, 2020, 05:50:01 PM
It would be interesting to see how many of the comorbidity C19 deaths would have occurred anyway from other causes in 2020 (based on prior years data). The fear mongers want us to believe it's 1918, the naysayers the opposite. As is always the case, the truth will be somewhere in the middle ::)

Here is that View.  2017 Death Data for the United States. 

I am estimating 82,000 deaths from Corona and how that would look if SLID into the profile from ~2 years ago.  This model assumes

--> NO NET INCREASE IN DEATH

In other words Corona just takes the place of the other CoMorbidities for the Year.

I don't quite understand what you did.  I see the 2017 #'s come from here https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm . 

I get that 82,000 is your estimated US Corona deaths but where are you getting the other figures in that column on your chart?  An estimate of 2020?

YES Estimate of 2020.

I took the Total Deaths in 2017 of 2.8MM people.  Then I put IN the Corona Virus. 

Let's assume that the EXACT SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE DIE THIS YEAR in 2020.  If Corona Virus is entered in how much would OTHER CoMorbidities have to DROP to keep the net change for the year at zero.

It turns out it is a 4.8% drop evenly spread to Cancer, Heart Disease, Respiratory Disease, Stroke, Diabetes and other Influenza.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 03, 2020, 06:01:00 PM
I saw a briefing with Andrew Cuomo last night saying that with full measures adhered to his numbers are showing 16,000 projected deaths for NY state.  Population of 20 M. (800 deaths per million).   He also said that he believed that the actual number which Dr Fauci had given the president was 94,000 deaths nationally if all measures were strictly adhered to nationally (all states).  With a population of 330 Million in the US that is 284 deaths per million people. 

In business we call what the president did on Sunday 3/29, announcing 1.1MM to 2.2MM deaths as possible "establishing a baseline."  This way you have an objective to measure against and succeed.

He, or Fuaci, then warned of 100K to 240K possible deaths given the measures taken. 

The president would NOT let that number get stated unless he could provide MORE successful results.  Therefore YES the real number is likely below 100K.  I suspect the real number could be HALF of that ~ 50,000.  BUT if it were 94K and it resulted in 284 deaths per 1MM that would be just above the data I showed for 2017 mortality of 17.1 Deaths per 100K from Influenza or 171 Deaths per Million.   
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 04, 2020, 01:18:48 AM
Flu deaths vary greatly by year.  CDC #'s below.  You can see why Neil Ferguson in the link above  had mentioned, "Let me be clear. This virus has a lethality substantially in excess of “seasonal” flu."  That is why even with the extraordinary measures currently being taken all of these estimates greatly exceed the flu average in resulting deaths.  Add to that that the flu, etc will continue to kill alongside Coronavirus. 

(https://www.cdc.gov/flu/images/about/burden/influenza-burden-chart2-960px.jpg)

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 04, 2020, 06:24:11 AM
I appreciate the data.

Adding up those 8 years totals: 303,000 deaths from the flu

According to estimates 700,000 people died from the Spanish Flu and it lasted 2 years. 

The common influenza killed 43% as many people in modern times but over a slightly longer time period. 

Either way these are some horrible numbers that until Corona never made the nightly news.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on April 04, 2020, 08:14:42 AM
We do actually have cold and flu seasons for a reason. Just the fact that spring is here may help flatten that curve.

https://news.yale.edu/2020/03/30/hopes-pandemic-respite-spring-may-depend-upon-what-happens-indoors?utm_source=YaleToday&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=YT_Yale%20Today%20-%20Best%20of%20the%20Week%20-%20Alumni_4-4-2020
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfcowboy on April 04, 2020, 08:19:36 AM
Also want to pitch in, in a non panicked way, that just because the net deaths stay the same in a model doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t take measures against this.

We can’t drop traffic deaths. We can mitigate these.

We’ve now seen that unimpeded, this thing runs like fire. Even if the deaths didn’t spike, the potential damage to the economy (and humans) from sick leave and hospital overload would be huge.

This isn’t Ebola, but it’s not the flu either that we can let “run its course.” It’s also a great dry run for our country for when a more serious one hits. Sadly, it takes an event like this to wake us up. 9/11 made us more secure from terrorism. Katrina made us reevaluate FEMA. This will ensure that Americans know how to handle the next one. Businesses will know how to be more resilient. And this is not political, I swear, but we will not sleep on funding research and response teams from now on.

If we get all of that out of this, then it’s been worth it to me. Painful, sad, but worth it.

Beasho, thank you for this service to our community. ERSI (ArcGIS) just reached out to my company for some help yesterday and I am thrilled we get to poke around with their stuff. Your visualizations are top notch.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 04, 2020, 11:09:29 AM
. . . .
Beasho, thank you for this service to our community. ERSI (ArcGIS) just reached out to my company for some help yesterday and I am thrilled we get to poke around with their stuff. Your visualizations are top notch.

Thank you for this.  I started this rampage because I wanted to figure out what was going on and don't trust the experts.  No scientist ever should. 

Someone posted about blaming the CCP in China.  I tried to bring up the topic last night with my wife and kids and they all Mutiny'd on me "Dad we don't want to talk about it .  . ." 

My point was going to be that this is biology.   And the biology is hard or in some cases impossible to stop.  The Asian countries have seen this before China, Singapore . . They locked down immediately.  Even if we had closed off traffic to China 3 weeks earlier would it have mattered.  How many infected people of the reported 750,000 Chinese that came to the US in Nov, Dec, and Jan would it have taken to kick this thing off.  1, 10, 25, 300?  Maybe just 1. 

To your point this had to wake the United States up.  We haven't had a pandemic in a while and thought it couldn't happen.  Unfortunately people have to die before behavior changes.  People make fun of Trump but what if he had acted sooner they would have called him a kook. 

If the Military had shot down the planes on the way to the World Trade centers there would have been h-ll to pay.  Now we know it should have been done. 

History will play out.  I hope my graphs help.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on April 04, 2020, 11:28:10 AM
People make fun of Trump but what if he had acted sooner they would have called him a kook.

No, I think they might have called him responsible.

You have done a lot of really good work Beasho and I commend you on it. But I simply cannot agree with the highlighted statement. He could have, and should have acted sooner. First Trump said Covid 19 was a hoax. Then he said it was no big deal and would go away. Then he said it was all under control and was nothing to worry about. And then, after something he saw on Fox TV, he said that he wanted to get the economy back up and running by Easter. Trump has been the model for how you don’t want a leader to act during a pandemic.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Chan on April 04, 2020, 12:39:38 PM
Trump has openly admitted that his initial response to this pandemic was wrong.  He said in a recent press conference, “some people” are saying that the country should merely “ride it out. Don’t do anything, just ride it out and think of it as the flu.”.  Inside sources revealed it was Trump himself who suggested "the just ride it out" strategy.   Trumps wealth protected business experiences and privileged upbringing have influenced his ideology and leadership style.  He views a high tolerance for risk as a strength.  Born into immense wealth and opportunity, he has never suffered the consequences of his past failures.  He’s walked away from bankruptcies, bad decisions, marriages, with little consequence.  He graduated from Wharton at a time when strong leadership included a calloused view toward human suffering and a strong bias towards leaders who followed their gut instincts.  Strong leaders didn't let emotional concerns or human compassion interfere with commerce.  Decisiveness and economic expansion were foremost. 

I was reminded in contrast of an anecdote, I think in Gladwell’s Outliers, of the Israeli leader who carried a note in his pocket “What if I’m wrong”   America would be in a much better place if the current leader had shared at least some of this questioning open mindedness.  If I’m wrong, millions of people will die unnecessarily and the US will have the highest percentage of deaths per capita of any industrialized nation.  Or, if I’m wrong, and proceed with an abundance of caution, incoming potentially exposed individuals will be needlessly quarantined for weeks.  If I'm wrong stay at home orders will be instituted and early social distancing implemented slowing the economy for weeks (but not months or years).  America now has far more infected than China, more than any other nation.  America, the wealthiest nation, will pay the greatest human cost and likely suffer the most economically.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 04, 2020, 12:43:23 PM
People make fun of Trump but what if he had acted sooner they would have called him a kook.

No, I think they might have called him responsible.

You have done a lot of really good work Beasho and I commend you on it. But I simply cannot agree with the highlighted statement. He could have, and should have acted sooner. First Trump said Covid 19 was a hoax. Then he said it was no big deal and would go away. Then he said it was all under control and was nothing to worry about. And then, after something he saw on Fox TV, he said that he wanted to get the economy back up and running by Easter. Trump has been the model for how you don’t want a leader to act during a pandemic.

I don't think the issues with Trump are so much that he waited too long to act, which he did, but the fact that he isn't a leader. He sends out mixed and unclear messages, he doesn't take responsibility, and he blames others. If you look at how the governors of California and New York take the lead, you'd see what we need.
 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on April 04, 2020, 01:09:54 PM
I don't think the issues with Trump are so much that he waited too long to act, which he did, but the fact that he isn't a leader. He sends out mixed and unclear messages, he doesn't take responsibility, and he blames others. If you look at how the governors of California and New York take the lead, you'd see what we need.

Absolutely agree with you Tom. Trump is simply not capable of strong leadership. He doesn’t have it in him.

I should also give full disclosure in that I am not an American. I am Canadian. I have not always been happy with our political leaders, but for the most part I think most of them have handled this situation well. I live in British Columbia and our Provincial Government has so far done a good job. The Government is forming policy and making decisions based on the science and the medical recommendations.

And what I really like is that while the Government and its’ Ministers remain present and accountable, they are bringing our Chief Medical Officer to the forefront. Chief Medical Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry has gained widespread respect and acclaim for the way she diligently and confidently, and with compassion, comes on TV every day and gives us the news and then answers questions. Adrian Dix is our Health Minister for the Government and he also participates in these daily press conferences, but it is Dr. Bonnie Henry who is taking the lead and who fields the majority of the questions. If we get through this pandemic in our Province it will be because of the leadership of Dr. Bonnie Henry, and also because we had politicians who were smart enough to let her take the lead.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: all~wet on April 04, 2020, 01:16:06 PM
There are many actions he could have taken at a very early date w/ no impact on ordinary citizens, little risk and heaps of upside. We'd be in a much greater position today and have mitigated an awful lot of pain, suffering, death and yes- economic loss.

It has been established he had intelligence reports in late December warning of a developing pandemic. How different would things be if he'd done any of the following heck- even February or March):

1). Preparation for acquiring /developing the means for widespread testing.
   
2). Mobilizing /preparing medical infrastructure, personnel, supplies, production, supply channels

3) Developed an organized unified plan with contingencies

4) Mobilized State Agencies

5) Not undermined truth, epidemiological / medical experts
   
There's more- but that's a good start. No one would have called him a kook. If it was negative headlines he could have done all of this with little attention or what he always does- blame someone else. And...this doesn't even address the impact his penchant for eviscerating and underfunding federal agencies that don't serve his corporate agenda or appointing incompetent unqualified Lackeys to lead them.  Sorry- rant over. I'll promptly, kindly go invisible and refocus on my family and things I have control over.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 04, 2020, 06:17:40 PM
Live interview Sunday with a NY surgeon on the front lines. 
12 noon CST. 

 https://youtu.be/PAHVZNqRr9E
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 04, 2020, 09:51:31 PM
People make fun of Trump but what if he had acted sooner they would have called him a kook.

No, I think they might have called him responsible.

. . . . If you look at how the governors of California and New York take the lead, you'd see what we need.

Let's do a Comparison of States and therefore Governors.  As measured by Deaths per 100K of its residents

1) State of Washington - Longest Exposure Got Surprised
2) California - Almost as Long an Exposure Sheltered in Place EARLY - Gavin Newsome doing well
3) New York - TERRIBLE Nearly as Bad as Italy and Spain.  NY might overtake those countries.

There is no comparison between NY and California with regards to the efficacy of their response. 

How else should can you rate their leadership?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on April 04, 2020, 11:08:06 PM
People make fun of Trump but what if he had acted sooner they would have called him a kook.

No, I think they might have called him responsible.

. . . . If you look at how the governors of California and New York take the lead, you'd see what we need.

Let's do a Comparison of States and therefore Governors.  As measured by Deaths per 100K of its residents

1) State of Washington - Longest Exposure Got Surprised
2) California - Almost as Long an Exposure Sheltered in Place EARLY - Gavin Newsome doing well
3) New York - TERRIBLE Nearly as Bad as Italy and Spain.  NY might overtake those countries.

There is no comparison between NY and California with regards to the efficacy of their response. 

How else should can you rate their leadership?


You have taken quotes from a few different posters and molded them all into one. And I’m really not sure what point you’re trying to make. So let me be clear about the point I was making, which is that in my opinion, Trump is a poor excuse for a leader.

You said if Trump would have acted sooner people would have called him a kook. Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn’t. We will never know. But even if they did, so what? Lives could have been saved if he would have acted sooner. Is that worth the price of being called a kook? I would certainly hope so.

Trump went so far as to say he didn’t want people to come off one of the cruise ships because it would make the numbers look bad. Not because they might infect others. Not because it might make others sick. No, he didn’t want to offer help because it would inflate the numbers. I wonder how the numbers look now?

Not once have I ever heard Trump take any responsibility for any of his inaction. In fact, he’s done the very opposite. After saying it was a hoax and then saying it would just go away, he then said he knew it was a pandemic before they were calling it a pandemic. Confusing? Yes. Leadership? No.

People make mistakes. Leaders make mistakes. I can admire someone who makes a mistake, owns it, and then learns from it and doesn’t let it happen again. Certainly haven’t seen any of that from Trump.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 04, 2020, 11:20:50 PM
Agreed.  Lots of Quotes at Once.  I was responding to Tom's quote:

. . . . If you look at how the governors of California and New York take the lead, you'd see what we need.

I will ask again "What is your definition of success."  This is not easy discussion but I think less death is good.

By every metric, today, Italy has done the poorest job on the planet.  Followed now by Spain. 

People are writing articles on Germany and how effective it has been at protecting its people.  Percentage wise the United States is Tracking with Germany and Japan with the lowest mortality rates in the World. 

Where is the news about the United States low mortality rates?

Articles on Germany:
https://reason.com/2020/03/30/early-and-broad-testing-helps-explain-why-covid-19-looks-less-lethal-in-germany/

Another:
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/03/germany-has-a-low-coronavirus-mortality-rate-heres-why.html
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 05, 2020, 01:49:24 AM
I have been impressed by Cuomo and NY's response.  They were the 4th state to issue a stay at home order (3 days after California).  They have been vigilant in supporting the suggestions of the CDC and WHO.  They have been vocal in their education about social distancing.  They have been exemplary in terms of real time information.  They have been equal parts compassionate and stern.  Moreover, they have been doing something really difficult which is assembling resources, hospitals, etc and expending funds for numbers that were/are projected but had not arrived yet.  That takes political courage.  What is the critique of NY's response?  I could understand questioning why they and other states seem so under inventorized in terms of medical gear but I am seeing an exemplary response.  What am I missing?

NYC is difficult.  As a huge hub for international travel and commerce and with such a condensed population riding subways, etc they are set up to be unusually impacted by a disease like this.  From the city we have seen a rapid spread to rural areas.

NY as a whole is very likely going to pass Italy in Deaths/Population in the next 3 days.  NY is only a State of 20 Million but it's stats would place it as one of the 3 hardest hit countries in the world and it may soon pass Italy as the absolute worst.

NY has been doing it right.  Unfortunately, the entire country has been battling dismissal, misinformation and ambiguity from the top.  This has affected all states including those with the highest inherent risks.  Leadership starts at the top.  The thing that will resonate with many of us long after this event has ended is the Hubris.  It would have been so easy for the president to simply publicly agree with the CDC, WHO etc.  The easy button was right there.  A presidential advisory that our scientific agencies had informed him of a real threat to our health, our economy and our national security and that they were proposing a set of behaviors that would mitigate the problem.  A statement that he was personally concerned about that and that he was advising the country of their patriotic duty to follow the proposed guidelines.  Special note that he himself, his family and his staff would be diligently following the guidelines.  Tell me that Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, both Bushes, Clinton, Obama, John McCain, Mitt Romney, etc. would not have done that as president.  It is crazy that we do not have stay at home orders in all states yet.  Any other president would be exerting maximum pressure to get that done.

There won't be articles about the US having a low fatality rate because models show us being near or at the top of the list for highest fatality rate in the next month.  Moreover, scientists believe that this will extend well into next year and that we will be back fighting our early decisions for a long time.

(https://www.kff.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Figure-State-Actions-by-Date.png)
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUPladomi on April 05, 2020, 03:07:21 AM
I have been impressed by Cuomo and NY's response.  They were the 4th state to issue a stay at home order (3 days after California). 

I agree with your points and would just add that NY took decisive action and quarantined New Rochelle much earlier, I believe it was March 3rd. Unfortunately, in hindsight it was insufficient. This suggests to me that the strategy of states doing geographic roll outs of stay at home is not effective. By extension, advocacy for stay at home orders in all 50 states would make sense to me, but it seems very unlikely to me that Trump would take such a bold step.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 08:09:12 AM
There won't be articles about the US having a low fatality rate because models show us being near or at the top of the list for highest fatality rate in the next month. Moreover, scientists believe that this will extend well into next year and that we will be back fighting our early decisions for a long time.

No No No!  Those are BAD MODELS!!!@!
[/b]

These statements are what keep me running the numbers. 

At one point people said "Italy is 2 weeks ahead of the United States."  This was 100% False.  The United States was infected 10 Days Earlier than ITALY.   100% False.

Then Germany receives praise for having a low death rate.  The United States has been Trending with Germany.  AS LOW AS GERMANY.

Current Heat map shows Germany is Growing Faster than the United States.  See 2nd Graph.

This line chart shows the Total Fatality Rate FOR Entire Countries.  The United States has NEVER risen above 4% on any given day where Italy and Spain have been above 10% for 3+ Weeks.  I had to take FRANCE off because it is way above 20%. 

No Comparison. Days Matter.  Isolation Matters.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Chan on April 05, 2020, 08:41:14 AM
Beasho,

What do you think will happen to the mortality rates if/when the US exceeds its medical care capacity as has happened in Italy and France?  I hope it doesn't, but every news report I've read claims it will in the near term.  This is regrettable on so many levels.  I'm sure we're all wishing beyond reason that the outcomes in the briefings prove to be cautionary not actual.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on April 05, 2020, 09:11:00 AM
What's absent in the notion of "judge the governors on the death rate" is the simple difference in the nature of the states they govern. North Dakota has the most effective governor by that measure.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on April 05, 2020, 09:11:36 AM
Beasho you asked earlier what is the definition of success and then went on to say you believed less death is good. It’s hard to argue with this.

But my first reply to your post was not about success. My reply was about leadership. I was replying in particular to your statement saying that if Trump would have acted sooner people would have called him a kook. I then called this statement from you into question as I believe Trump should have acted sooner and by his failure to do so, and on many other fronts, he has shown very poor leadership.

So let me explain why I don’t think you can equate success in terms of death rates between different regions, to leadership. First of all, death rates can be attributed to many things. As an example one area may have an older population or its’ citizens may have more underlying health problems. Or it could have a more densely populated citizenry. So if you have an older population with more underlying health problems in a more densely packed area, then even if this area has a strong leader, they may still have a higher death rate than a different area that has a younger population that is more spread out, even if this second area has a weaker leader.

So I don’t believe the death rate between different regions can be used to determine who is or is not a strong leader. I would agree that a strong leader in a particular region should equate to a lower death rate in that particular region. This won’t always be the case as even strong leaders can make mistakes, but generally speaking, I would agree that a strong leader in a particular region should equate to a lower death rate in that region.

My point however, through all of this is that Trump has failed to show anything close to strong leadership.

It was you Beasho who said that if Trump had acted sooner people would have called him a kook. And it was this statement from you that prompted me to reply.

And since I’ve tried to answer your question about success and leadership, let me ask you a direct question.

Do you believe President Trump has shown strong leadership during the Covid 19 pandemic?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 10:06:12 AM
OK!  I just spent a bunch of Time to Pull and Validate the US States Data.

This gets interesting.  Here is an overview. 

I will remind of my Motto from 3 weeks ago.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 10:10:54 AM
What's absent in the notion of "judge the governors on the death rate" is the simple difference in the nature of the states they govern. North Dakota has the most effective governor by that measure.

Nope!  Wyoming is Winning.  Here is the view by STATE.  Please share your source - Who is saying North Dakota has a low death rate?

Worst to Best and Best to Worst.

Source: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nytimes/covid-19-data/master/us-counties.csv
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 05, 2020, 10:20:12 AM
Hi Beasho,

Your own estimate of 82,000 deaths in the US is 248 deaths per Million people.  That is the same as where Italy is today.  You had also mentioned that Italy's curve was flattening.  New York will sadly pass Italy today or tomorrow in Death/Population.  New York is projected to have 16000 dead in a month's time.  That is higher than the current death count for the entire Country of Italy today (NY has one third of Italy's population). 

Scientists are providing a wide range of models for the US as a whole depending largely on our performance as a society, but most have us at over 100,000 deaths even with a nationwide (all states in compliance) stay at home order.  You are basing your assumptions largely on start dates that are believed to be incorrect and testing data that is known to be inaccurate.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, Countries like Italy have intentionally limited their tests over time while others have broadened.  That is not a contested fact.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 10:50:27 AM
OK - This is where it gets interesting.  I filtered on CASES Reported >>100 per municipality. 

This accounts for ~ 91% of all Cases in US.

Here is the Sort Order on those County Cities by Descending Death %. 

Not a single ONE LOCATION OF SIZE IN THE UNITED STATES at the Average of:

ITALY (14.6%), SPAIN (10.3%) OR FRANCE (12.7%) Average for the past 2 weeks.

Not one of more than 2,400 locations. 

Only 20 locations are over 5% with any appreciable number of CASES.


If you understand the MATH, Diversification Effect, Law of Averages and Normal Curves this should be VERY Revealing.  Virtually Impossible.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 05, 2020, 11:12:19 AM
You had asked us to focus on the bodies a few posts back.  That is indeed the telling number.  The relationship of deaths to cases (where the data is known to be super inaccurate) is not going to be of any interest in hindsight.

Again, New York will have more Deaths/Population than Italy in the next two days and is projected to have almost 4 times Italy within a month.  The US as a whole is projected to have 4 times the Deaths and substantially higher Death/Population.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on April 05, 2020, 11:26:57 AM
I tried earlier to answer your question Beasho as to what I believe is the definition of success.

But you have ignored my question.

So I’ll ask it again. Do you believe Donald Trump has shown strong leadership during the Covid 19 Pandemic?

And I’ll add if you do believe Donald Trump has shown strong leadership, can you please provide examples to support your belief.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 11:29:35 AM
You had asked us to focus on the bodies a few posts back.  That is indeed the telling number.  The relationship of deaths to cases (where the data is known to be super inaccurate) is not going to be of any interest in hindsight.

Again, New York will have more Deaths/Population than Italy in the next two days and is projected to have almost 4 times Italy within a month.  The US as a whole is projected to have 4 times the Deaths and substantially higher Death/Population.

Admin - Here is what NY looks like.  I had to dig deeper into CASE counts to >50.  There are only 3 locations with Death Rates Higher than 5%.

This is NO WHERE Near the 10%, 15%+ that Italy has been reporting for the past 3 weeks.  Please share your data.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 11:35:57 AM
But you have ignored my question.
/quote]

Please bring data to support your arguments of Good / Bad leadership.  If you want to to spin a narrative on how much you love or hate Trump please start another thread.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 05, 2020, 11:44:59 AM
Hi Beasho,

It looks like your Data is a day old.  In that time NY has jumped from the 3200 deaths on your chart to the 4100 at Johns Hopkins (before noon).  NY is early in the curve and is escalating at an awful pace.  The US is as well.  Italy is slowing.

I circled cases for reference but I am not considering cases at all.  Your charts take no account for population which is really what matters.  Deaths in relations to population.


Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on April 05, 2020, 11:47:42 AM
But you have ignored my question.
/quote]

Please bring data to support your arguments of Good / Bad leadership.  If you want to to spin a narrative on how much you love or hate Trump please start another thread.



O.K. Beasho, you don’t want to answer my question. I’ll leave it alone, other than to remind you that it was you who opened this up by saying if Trump would have acted sooner he would have been called a kook. It was you who brought Trump into this, not me. I simply reacted to your statement and now you are refusing to back up what you said.




Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 11:55:57 AM
Hi Beasho,
It looks like your Data is a day old.  In that time NY has jumped from the 3200 deaths on your chart to the 4100 at Johns Hopkins (before noon).  NY is early in the curve and is escalating at an awful pace.  The US is as well.  Italy is slowing.

Yes - John's Hopkins data is slightly ahead.  I was using that John's Hopkins data but it was a problem because they kept shifting columns and moving data fields.   Fortunately the data is in-line with the WHO data. 

Let's assume the jump goes from ~ 114,500 to 122,000 that would be 7,500 new cases.  My source for COUNTY level information is from New York Times. 

This over the 122,000 would be 16 Days to double putting NY in the Decelerating Camp.  Much like Italy. 

A total horror show but the CASE rate slowing % as measured by Days to Double. 

I think Cuomo is also confirming this when he says the peak should come in 2 or 3 days (from memory).
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 05, 2020, 12:25:08 PM
Hi Beasho,

Cuomo from yesterday:

Gov. Andrew Cuomo said on Saturday that New York had about seven days to prepare for the coronavirus apex in the state, warning that “we’re not yet ready for the high point.”
“Our reading of the projections is: We are somewhere in the seven-day range,” Cumo said at a press briefing on the COVID-19 crisis. “Four, five, six, seven, eight-day range.”

As I mentioned, when New York reaches ~5000 cases the state will pass the Country of Italy in deaths/population.  That will happen in the next few days. 

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfinJ on April 05, 2020, 02:39:07 PM
Colorful graphs and dry numbers.  Any empathy here?  “One for all and all for one”? 

My buddies and family in NY are describing a very grim ambiance.

Tracking with Germany?  Are you just in the numbers and missing the drama being experienced by your countrymen? 
Germany’s non partisan built up and extremely robust healthcare system is the reason. They were ready.

As far as the data available, I know from my friends experience that they are not testing or accounting.
And now I have read that there is significant under reporting of virus deaths due to the lack of testing.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 02:39:25 PM
The numbers still don't add up.  The United States is NOT ITALY.  NY - Maybe but Unlikely.  THIS IS GOOD NEWS!

Let's even say that NY goes the way of Italy.  (This is a tall order because there is NO SINGLE municipality in the United States that is close to the Italy's death%).   Italy has a 12.3% death rate.  NY stands at 2.8%.  We have to go back 5 weeks to find Italy at a 2.8% death rate.  At the beginning of their outbreak.  They then had 1 Day Death % of 20% to 25% of New CASES Every Day for 2 Weeks.

Eventually the Total % Death Rate climbed to 12.3% of Cases. 

Let's assume NY will climb.  NY is still just one State.  One state with <<10% of the population.  Look at the 2nd chart.  There is another 160MM people in States with Half as many current deaths.  10X the population with slightly more than half the current deaths.  The other states don't have the density of people and behavior has changed. 

There is no way the rest of the country catches up.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 03:01:47 PM
Colorful graphs and dry numbers.  Any empathy here?  “One for all and all for one”? 
. . . I know from my friends experience that they are not testing or accounting.
And now I have read that there is significant under reporting of virus deaths due to the lack of testing.

If you know it then share the source.  If Germany is so much better than the United States and we are doomed to a gruesome future then share the evidence.   

I find comfort in these numbers and if I can help a few others contextualize what is happening then great.  Without the numbers we are at the whim of Snake Oil salesmen and Shaman Hand-wavers.  Fox vs. CNN.  Without numbers there is NO SCIENCE. 

I am reminded of a quote from a fellow Ithacan:

“At the heart of science is an essential balance between two seemingly contradictory attitudes--an openness to new ideas, no matter how bizarre or counterintuitive they may be, and the most ruthless skeptical scrutiny of all ideas, old and new. This is how deep truths are winnowed from deep nonsense.”  CARL SAGAN
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 03:12:28 PM
Scientists are providing a wide range of models for the US as a whole depending largely on our performance as a society, but most have us at over 100,000 deaths even with a nationwide (all states in compliance) stay at home order.  You are basing your assumptions largely on start dates that are believed to be incorrect and testing data that is known to be inaccurate.

Here is another Dry and Callous perspective.  But I do think this guy knows how to build a model:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/05/bill-gates-coronavirus-pandemic-a-nightmare-scenario.html

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 05, 2020, 03:16:11 PM
The numbers still don't add up.  The United States is NOT ITALY.  NY - Maybe but Unlikely.  THIS IS GOOD NEWS!

Hi Beasho,

Your own estimate from the last page of 82,000 deaths for the USA is 5.2 times the raw death count of Italy's current death count of 16,000.  The death/population would be equal using those figures.  The figures in your last post would make the US significantly worse.

In what way is that not worse than Italy?

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 05, 2020, 03:24:21 PM
Latest Dynamic Model with STATE Level information has been published:

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on April 05, 2020, 06:28:00 PM
I did some sloppy modeling, looking at all the published models and data sets for the USA. I start with the notion that we have no idea of how many people are infected and could be wrong about when the big curve started. Move the inception date back a week, assume 10X for the real infection rate, and we're at the peak. Actually, we kind of were there yesterday.

This is no more than a guess, but we should see some useful data in the next few days. I think the read denominator is more like 20X, but I have no evidence for that, just a hunch. I keep looking at the death curve and I think it's more a measure of how wadded up the hospitals are than a measure of how bad the virus is. Anywhere that's under stress it's a lot worse, and it doesn't seem to take much stress to kick up the death rate. Looking at the data from here: https://covidtracking.com and here: https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections  it appears that any time the hospitals get close to full ICUs the death rate climbs quickly. 

I should mention that flattening the curve moves the peak out into the future. I guess that might be obvious to people used to reducing data, but it was a little bit of a surprise to me.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: stoneaxe on April 05, 2020, 11:23:41 PM
Surprised?....isn't that the point of flattening the curve? Attenuation stretches it all out. The end will be even further into the future too.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: dietlin on April 06, 2020, 05:40:43 AM
The crux of the matter:


it appears that any time the hospitals get close to full ICUs the death rate climbs quickly. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 06, 2020, 06:54:02 AM
We are seeing tops in daily confirmed deaths in many countries and it would be great if the US joined them in the next few days (or has joined them).  These counties are seeing massive losses at the top of their curves and the nature of the downslope from this first upsurge is as of yet unknown.  This graph current from this morning at https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus is super useful because it shows the curves beginning when each country reached 5 deaths.  That lines things up pretty closely so you can get a better sense of relative escalation over days.  It uses a rolling seven day average to round out potential daily oddities.  This is a very good for judging how well the curve has been flattened in each location. 



Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 06, 2020, 09:03:32 AM
Thanks again Beasho for the data and standing strong with it.

I am like you, I feel much better looking at the data myself. Empathy has nothing to do with it. Knowing makes me comfortable.

Early in this epidemic, I believed China was being honest in their data collection and dissemination and it gave me a false hope. They provided harmful data to the rest of the world. Their numbers were never adding up even from the earliest cases in American cities. Anytime the media states "studies from China" in any report it should be taken with an ocean of salt.

Of course cities/states/media in the US are great at feeding out catastrophe. It is an addicting endorphin for some people. So much of it is just theater IMO.

WA (my state) has hit the peak in deaths and hospital needs for this round. WA and OR are returning over 400 ventilators, and the prior week Governor Inslee was demanding Trump start the Defense Protection Act to make more ventilators.

It will be really interesting to see how the roll back into "normal" works, and how the CV cases respond. WA governor Inslee is planning on wearing the COVID success like a badge as he makes another run for president, and my inclination is that he will keep on the strict stay-home order longer than most just to prove it.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 06, 2020, 11:08:14 AM
BEASHO,

IMHE (UW) (CDC) just revised their national death toll do 81,766 -  so your 82k number is tracking perfect right now, but by end of day on 4/9 you are going to end up being too high.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 06, 2020, 02:08:25 PM
I saw a briefing with Andrew Cuomo last night saying that with full measures adhered to his numbers are showing 16,000 projected deaths for NY state.  Population of 20 M. (800 deaths per million).   He also said that he believed that the actual number which Dr Fauci had given the president was 94,000 deaths nationally if all measures were strictly adhered to nationally (all states).  With a population of 330 Million in the US that is 284 deaths per million people. 

In business we call what the president did on Sunday 3/29, announcing 1.1MM to 2.2MM deaths as possible "establishing a baseline."  This way you have an objective to measure against and succeed.

He, or Fuaci, then warned of 100K to 240K possible deaths given the measures taken. 

The president would NOT let that number get stated unless he could provide MORE successful results.  Therefore YES the real number is likely below 100K.
I suspect the real number could be HALF of that ~ 50,000.
BUT if it were 94K and it resulted in 284 deaths per 1MM that would be just above the data I showed for 2017 mortality of 17.1 Deaths per 100K from Influenza or 171 Deaths per Million.

I had to go find what my latest estimate was and I put down 50,000.  Yes I see that HealthData.ORG revised down to 81,766. This is pretty good news.  My ballpark was / is still on the low end of their estimates.

82,000 was for Illustrative purposes. let's say the high end of my range. 

http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

However the 82,000 was part of an even BOLDER prediction which would be ZERO NET DEATHS For 2020. 

When taken over the entire year the Corona Virus would just displace 82,000 other Chronic Disease @ Risk people.  The net result for 2020 would be ZERO incremental total deaths from Corona Virus.  With the reduction in travel and general @ risk behavior the Net number may be negative.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 06, 2020, 03:09:32 PM
We are seeing tops in daily confirmed deaths in many countries and it would be great if the US joined them in the next few days (or has joined them). . .

I have looked at the trailing Death count but just built it into a view using Trailing 5 Days.  The US is JUST about there.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Area 10 on April 06, 2020, 03:43:08 PM
The stats about infections or death rates in Europe are largely nonsense. People with very obvious COVID symptoms are not being tested in the UK and elsewhere. The hospitals are often actively avoiding testing.

So as far as modelling goes, garbage in, garbage out.

IMO watch instead the total number of deaths in the country and how that differs from seasonally-adjusted norms.

But Staying at home has led to a decrease in deaths due to cardiac problems, road traffic accident, head injury etc. So even that data is hard to interpret.

We don’t really know what is going on, I’m afraid, in Europe. What we are discovering is that this disease can cause heart inflammation and also brain inflammation in some people and that this might be causing a significant number of the deaths rather than respiratory problems per se. So the recordings of deaths when testing is not being done is error-prone: what is recorded?

We are learning about this thing as we go along, and mostly the data is of such poor quality that it’s hard to draw any conclusions that are more than vaguely guided speculation. Maybe you have better data in the US.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: pdxmike on April 06, 2020, 09:54:26 PM
With the reduction in travel and general @ risk behavior the Net number may be negative.
I can't help but think vehicular deaths are going to be down significantly this year.

On the other hand, I'd assume there will be some additional deaths due to people not going in for or delaying non-virus medical things--tests, preventative stuff...



Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 07, 2020, 02:24:12 AM
The stats about infections or death rates in Europe are largely nonsense. People with very obvious COVID symptoms are not being tested in the UK and elsewhere. The hospitals are often actively avoiding testing.

So as far as modelling goes, garbage in, garbage out.

IMO watch instead the total number of deaths in the country and how that differs from seasonally-adjusted norms.

But Staying at home has led to a decrease in deaths due to cardiac problems, road traffic accident, head injury etc. So even that data is hard to interpret.

We don’t really know what is going on, I’m afraid, in Europe. What we are discovering is that this disease can cause heart inflammation and also brain inflammation in some people and that this might be causing a significant number of the deaths rather than respiratory problems per se. So the recordings of deaths when testing is not being done is error-prone: what is recorded?

We are learning about this thing as we go along, and mostly the data is of such poor quality that it’s hard to draw any conclusions that are more than vaguely guided speculation. Maybe you have better data in the US.

Hi Area10,

You are right.  Check out this page: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing-source-data# .  They intended to follow testing over time in each country.  It looks like they eventually found it too problematic to continue.  They go over the issues in each country.

I learned that in the USA in many states negative tests are not being reported at all so while we can get a raw number of positives we cannot get a number of positives/people tested. That would be super relevant as it could tell how representative our testing results have been.  This is particularly vexing because they have this information.  The system was just not in place for it to be entered.  That is aside from the other issues caused by insufficient test availability, etc.  Same is true here of naming cause of deaths in ambiguous cases (deaths where testing has not occurred).  I read that we are following no one standard on how to do this from state to state.  We don't know the level of false attribution.  I red two articles about this yesterday which came to very different conclusions.

On the upside, it does seem possible that there will be sufficient motivation going forward to improve collection systems and coordinate testing information globally.  One the one hand we are witnessing the first near real time sharing of international data in the moment of a crisis.  That makes analysis like Beasho is doing possible.  That is pretty remarkable if you think about it.  On the other hand it is frustrating to everyone to have that data be so problematic.  Granted, nothing ever goes smoothly in the moment of a crisis but it is so much worse when the systems are not in place.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: ninja tuna on April 07, 2020, 04:44:07 AM
admin,

is this what you are looking for in terms of testing vs cases

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 07, 2020, 07:30:24 AM
Hi Ninja,

You are absolutely correct that a lot of testing data has been collected.   The site that you linked is showing the testing data that is in the system.  My understanding of what the ourworldindata site was trying to do was to justify that data in a meaningful way (make sense of the inconsistencies that they were finding in each country).  As far as I can see they have stopped doing that. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 07, 2020, 11:58:59 AM
https://youtu.be/E7MufS6dnJw
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 07, 2020, 05:50:05 PM
More good news. 

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/unprecedented-nationwide-blood-studies-seek-track-us-coronavirus-spread
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 08, 2020, 08:14:01 AM
The IMHE (UW) (CDC) model moved down again today to 60k deaths by August (from 82k on Monday). This model had already taken into account the effect of social distancing, but I am not sure to what degree. I know early in the outbreak they assumed 50% social distancing. So I am guessing that the current model must be starting to use some of the effective treatment rates.

So, Beasho's 50k deaths is still probably a good number for this week, but 30k is looking more accurate.

Now I am waiting to see a plan for re-opening the country. I hope each state is working hard on this. The plan cannot be "everything is back to normal" infections would spike, but I also don't think it can be you have to have an antibody license to move around. Guessing it will be some form of relaxed social distancing, but they should definitely make outdoor activities (work and play) start back up first. These are easy to social distance and healthy.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 08, 2020, 09:01:02 AM
Yesterday was an awful day in terms of deaths.  A portion of many models is being based on the death data from  other countries.  Trying to align curves to adjust for start times and use their curves to gauge what our own might be.  There was a false top a few days ago that gave hope that we were later in the curve than had been thought.  Watching this unfold you can see the real world problems in trying to predict this stuff.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 09, 2020, 12:11:17 PM
Here's a good interactive graph that shows projections for countries, and states

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 09, 2020, 12:48:31 PM
That is a really nice set of graphs for the IMHE model.  Here is an excellent article on that model (and others):

https://freebeacon.com/coronavirus/a-popular-covid-19-model-just-got-rosier-dont-read-too-much-into-it/

A bigger issue, however, is that the IHME model makes very strong assumptions about how effective and widespread social distancing will be. It assumes that just 3 percent of the population will end up infected by SARS-CoV-2, compared with ranges of 25 to 70 percent in other models. Such an outcome is only possible if social distancing measures are comprehensive and remain in place through the end of May.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on April 09, 2020, 01:03:30 PM
Such an outcome is only possible if social distancing measures are comprehensive and remain in place through the end of May.
Until when....?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 10, 2020, 06:08:36 AM
I have been screaming about CoMorbidity since I saw the statistics 3 weeks ago out of China then confirmed by Bloomberg in Italy and the data from Imperial College.  All 100% aligned on the risk to PRIOR HEALTH CONDITIONS.

Then on Sunday 60 Minutes was reporting and the doctor said "We see a high correlation with Obesity."  BMI > than 40 is listed as Morbid Obesity.  And there it was the word again.

Obesity.  Might the Corona virus just target Obesity. 

Obesity as the Leading indicator of death NOT as the Last of a short list of CoMorbidities.

Obesity, Heart Disease, Cancer, Respiratory Disease . . .


PS: The President knows this.  He was at a press conference 3 weeks ago citing how terrible the disease is.  He said something like "I have a friend with the virus.  One day he is fine 3 days later he is in a coma on a ventilator.  It's vicious . . He was a little heavy . . but its terrrible."  He knows.

---------
Reuters on Obesity:
“This virus is terrible, it can hit young people, in particular obese young people. Those who are overweight really need to be careful,” Delfraissy told France info radio.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-france-confinement/obesity-is-major-covid-19-risk-factor-says-french-chief-epidemiologist-idUSKBN21Q0S7

World Obesity at Risk with BMI >> 25
 “Given the extremely high rates of obesity around the globe we expect that a high percentage of the population who will contract coronavirus will also have a BMI over 25.”
https://www.worldobesity.org/news/statement-coronavirus-covid-19-obesity

Doctors on Obesity (in Connecticut):
Dr. John Morton who heads up Bariatric Surgery with Yale Medicine explains, “There’s something called hypoventilation syndrome and that is when you have extra tissue around your chest.  It’s harder to take deep breaths.”
Obesity also increases the risk for health issues such as diabetes and high blood pressure.
https://www.wtnh.com/news/health/coronavirus/what-you-need-to-know-about-obesity-and-covid-19/

ZERO NET DEATHS Theory:
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Rider on April 10, 2020, 07:25:24 AM
Is Stage-4 TDS considered an underlying morbidity?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 10, 2020, 07:26:06 AM
Live model here. 

I modified my 30 day death estimate to use exponential smoothing.  In other words you can't go EXPONENTIAL forever.  Brings down the 30 day estimate to 46K. 

New State Heatmap shown here.  What states are performing WELL as measure by Days to Double and Which are NOT performing well. 

NY, LA are emerging from the high burn phase.  Although NY now has more cases than any other SINGLE country (~ same as Spain).

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 10, 2020, 07:27:40 AM
Is Stage-4 TDS considered an underlying morbidity?

 :o

Just can't escape it.  I had to look that one up.  Chucky Darwin will let us know. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: NEplay on April 10, 2020, 07:32:08 AM
"Is Stage-4 TDS considered an underlying morbidity?"

I laughed out loud.

I have been following this thread and really appreciate the effort. Thank you. Most of it is above my pay grade but Beasho's numbers always seem to be days ahead of what the media eventually reports.

Is it to early to start getting data how many lives have been saved or not(?) by our sitting in our stew  instead of wafting through everybody elses?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: ninja tuna on April 10, 2020, 08:49:42 AM
Thanks for all this Beasho.

In terms of modelling. I have not heard any comparison to any other type of modeling.  Lots of moving parts, predicting into future time frames.   Being in Florida,  I see a good similarity to hurricane forecasting.  I have heard very little in terms any variation in models. Maybe I have missed it.  But it seems like I am only hearing about this IMHE model or whatever it is.  With hurricanes, they use quite a few models and form the infamous "cones of uncertainty".  Those usually go a week out and the hurricanes usually go outside of those 1 week prdecitions.

So someone comes up with a model with drastic numbers and every one jumps on it because "if it bleeds it leads" mantra of the news.  It is just like the hurricane that was coming towards Florida a few years ago.  Weather man comes on tv and tells everyone "IF YOU DON"T EVACUATE YOU ARE GONNA DIE!"    Lots of people stayed and there were under 5 deaths. Dont remember but very few.

Effing idiot

So basically what i am getting at is with all the weather modelling with all the their super-computing power missing the target so many times. Should we have expected the models to get this right?

And for it being blown out of proportion as much as it has been, imo, when something possibly more serious along the lines of an ebola type virus may rip around the world, a lot of people will not take it as seriously and there will be worse statistics. Just like the weather people say to prepare for all the hurricanes that never hit.  A lot of people got complacent for a while.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: ninja tuna on April 10, 2020, 09:51:45 AM
and right after I post this someone in the Florida governors update says something along the lines of people in Florida getting complacent from hurricanes.

Then i found this.

https://chicagocitywire.com/stories/530092711-roseland-hospital-phlebotomist-30-of-those-tested-have-coronavirus-antibody
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 10, 2020, 10:21:58 AM
Thanks Beasho.

Obesity is a true epidemic, but I guess the answer would be a "don't stay home" order forcing us out of our homes to the parks and beaches.

A lot of talk about models being incorrect, but all models are incorrect. If you think of them as a tool to elicit a response instead of a set of facts they make more sense. Beasho's models are more correct because he does not have any skin in the game in setting policy. If you work for the IMHE and you know that your model is going to be used to set policy, you are going to provide a wider range of outcomes, and use more conservative (less realistic) assumptions. No one wants their name on a CV-19 death.

The next question in my mind is: Don't we want to keep the infections level, now that the curve has flattened? I.e. throttling human interactions to keep the hospitals actively testing cases? I foresee testing data falling off soon, in that if we all stay home, and the hot spots are eliminated, no one will go get tested. Providing a false sense of the virus being eliminated and allowing normal life to resume and thus instantaneous flare ups? I mean we are going to be awash in PPE and ventilators, and hospitals are reducing staff. We will not have a vaccine for a year, so lets get on with herd immunity if we can support it with the hospitals current capability.

Just anecdotal, but one of the guys I coach youth sports with is a nurse. He is having his hours reduced 20% in order to avoid layoffs across the board at his hospital. I asked him about testing and he told me that they have plenty of tests but no customers. Our local county has 8 cases, but one is the same guy twice. He had a negative and then another positive a week later, so they counted it as new.

 

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 10, 2020, 10:28:14 AM
Thanks Beasho.

Obesity is a true epidemic, but I guess the answer would be a "don't stay home" order forcing us out of our homes to the parks and beaches.

A lot of talk about models being incorrect, but all models are incorrect. If you think of them as a tool to elicit a response instead of a set of facts they make more sense. Beasho's models are more correct because he does not have any skin in the game in setting policy. If you work for the IMHE and you know that your model is going to be used to set policy, you are going to provide a wider range of outcomes, and use more conservative (less realistic) assumptions. No one wants their name on a CV-19 death.

The next question in my mind is: Don't we want to keep the infections level, now that the curve has flattened? I.e. throttling human interactions to keep the hospitals actively testing cases? I foresee testing data falling off soon, in that if we all stay home, and the hot spots are eliminated, no one will go get tested. Providing a false sense of the virus being eliminated and allowing normal life to resume and thus instantaneous flare ups? I mean we are going to be awash in PPE and ventilators, and hospitals are reducing staff. We will not have a vaccine for a year, so lets get on with herd immunity if we can support it with the hospitals current capability.

Just anecdotal, but one of the guys I coach youth sports with is a nurse. He is having his hours reduced 20% in order to avoid layoffs across the board at his hospital. I asked him about testing and he told me that they have plenty of tests but no customers. Our local county has 8 cases, but one is the same guy twice. He had a negative and then another positive a week later, so they counted it as new.

Where do you live?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 10, 2020, 10:50:46 AM
Washington State

Grays Harbor County. Its a big county with not many people.

https://www.doh.wa.gov/Emergencies/Coronavirus

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on April 10, 2020, 11:50:04 AM
Thanks Beasho.

Obesity is a true epidemic,
There may be a link to people who suffer from hypertension. Falling in that category are overweight people and people genetically predisposed to it. One of the blood pressure Rx type is an (ACE) inhibitor. The COVID-19 virus uses a receptor called ACE-2 to enter the cell. No conclusive tests yet linking the two, but there might be a connection.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: digger71 on April 10, 2020, 05:27:41 PM

There may be a link to people who suffer from hypertension.

Found this for NY while searching for deaths by age group, but not sure if it exists on a national level.  Breaks out the comorbidities as well as age groups

https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Fatalities
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Stew on April 11, 2020, 01:13:14 AM
Live model here. 

I modified my 30 day death estimate to use exponential smoothing.  In other words you can't go EXPONENTIAL forever.  Brings down the 30 day estimate to 46K. 

New State Heatmap shown here.  What states are performing WELL as measure by Days to Double and Which are NOT performing well. 

NY, LA are emerging from the high burn phase.  Although NY now has more cases than any other SINGLE country (~ same as Spain).

https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9

Anyway to break Europe down into individual countries? Italy is on it's own. It would be interesting to see all the other countries split out as they're quite varied.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 11, 2020, 02:50:56 AM
If you work for the IMHE and you know that your model is going to be used to set policy, you are going to provide a wider range of outcomes, and use more conservative (less realistic) assumptions. No one wants their name on a CV-19 death.

Below is the note that IMHE posts with every model and every chart.  Any model that does not state similar is pulling your Willy.  An IMHE representative was also on the news last night and said that should strong distancing measures be relaxed in 2 weeks (which they consider far too early), their model (which was built on holding strong distancing measures until the end of May) would then show over 200,000 deaths by end of July.  Lastly, the latest IMHE model update showed the death count peaking two days ago but this has not yet occurred.  Were they incorrect?  Of course not.  You have seen the DIY models with sliders that others have posted here.  Tweak any variable by a tick and you have altered the results by 20,000 lives.  Lastly, there are nowhere near enough tests.  This is the coming fro the medical community.  That is not to say that there will not be surpluses in some regions.   

Uncertainty is the range of values that is likely to include the correct projected estimate for a given data category. Larger uncertainty intervals can result from limited data availability, small studies, and conflicting data, while smaller uncertainty intervals can result from extensive data availability, large studies, and data that are consistent across sources.

The model presented in this tool has a 95% uncertainty interval and is represented by the shaded area(s) on each chart.


Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: surfcowboy on April 11, 2020, 07:44:58 AM
This has been great, but as was said, until we know how many people have this and don’t know it, we’re hosed.

Antibody tests are out there. LOS Angeles is testing 1,000 people a day now, randomly chosen, and anyone can apply. Over the next couple of weeks we will start to see those ghost cases that no one knew they had. We can make the call better then.

Articles (Stanford) now speculating that last Fall’s bad early “flu” in CA was C19. Long shot, but also would be another reason we were hit less hard.

I’m hoping for a 30% infection rate in CA right now as I type. It might not be there but a guy can hope.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 11, 2020, 08:55:11 AM
The model presented in this tool has a 95% uncertainty interval and is represented by the shaded area(s) on each chart.[/b][/size]

This really pisses me off.  I work to make sure my reports are near 100% perfect.  There are a few small math issues with running totals and averages based upon how the data comes in but I would be willing to say my data is 98%+ accurate with regards to the source vs. 95% wrong.  Holy Moly.   
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 11, 2020, 08:57:27 AM

There may be a link to people who suffer from hypertension.

Found this for NY while searching for deaths by age group, but not sure if it exists on a national level.  Breaks out the comorbidities as well as age groups

https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Fatalities

More data on CoMorbidity and it is practically hidden.  I had to stitch together 3 Screen shots to put this view together.  I am not kidding you can NOT see this view anywhere.  You have to scroll through 3 rows at a time.

81% of Deaths in NY listed as CoMorbid.

Yet again numbers Closer to 100% than even 50% EVERYWHERE YOU TURN.  Obesity is NOT listed as a CoMorbidity.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 11, 2020, 09:01:35 AM
Putting the data together from the website.  I could not scrape or find a programmatic source.   I had to type this data into a spreadsheet.

The CoMorbidities add to More than 200% of the deaths.  What!  This means the average person had 2.1 CoMorbidities. 

Add to this COVID-19 and you have 3.1X CoMorbidities. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 11, 2020, 09:06:03 AM
This article is the most complete I have seen on the collection of Obesity related complications to Covid-19:

https://www.businessinsider.com/americas-obesity-epidemic-may-make-the-coronavirus-pandemic-worse-2020-4

1) "a "sophisticated internist" in New York City told him at least 90% of the people under age 50 he's seen ventilated due to COVID-19 were obese. "

2) Fatima Fakhoury, a weight-inclusive registered dietitian in New York, told Business Insider a colleague in Cornell's surgical intensive-care unit, told her "every one" of her 60 ventilated patients in a single day, whether 28 or 85, was obese.

3) Looking at 383 COVID-19 patients in China, researchers found that people who were overweight had an 86% higher likelihood or developing severe pneumonia than their normal weight counterparts. Those who were obese were 2.4 (read 240%) times more likely to develop it.

4) Higher-weight men were particularly at risk, with those who overweight almost twice as likely to develop the condition and those who were obese 5.7 (read 570%) times more likely.  "Those are really stunning odds ratios," Dr. Gregory Poland, an infectious disease expert at the Mayo Clinic, told Business Insider.

5) "Prior to COVID-19, we already knew that obesity is a risk factor for infection in general and more severe complications, and this is particularly true for respiratory infections," Poland said.   During the 2009 H1N1 epidemic in 2009, adults with body mass indexes over 30 were 3.1 (read 310%) times more likely to die from the infection than people of lower weights, while adults with body mass indexes over 40 were 7.6 (read 760%) times more likely to die.

6) "At the immunological system level, the human body is extremely poorly adapted to chronic caloric overload," Poland said. "It's as bad for our immune system as malnutrition is."  Particularly among people who carry their body fat around the middle, obesity can activate inflammation and weaken the body's anti-inflammatory response, making them more susceptible to illness, research suggests.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 11, 2020, 09:10:55 AM
I have been screaming about CoMorbidity since I saw the statistics 3 weeks ago out of China then confirmed by Bloomberg in Italy and the data from Imperial College.  All 100% aligned on the risk to PRIOR HEALTH CONDITIONS.

Then on Sunday 60 Minutes was reporting and the doctor said "We see a high correlation with Obesity." BMI > than 40 is listed as Morbid Obesity.  And there it was the word again.

Obesity.  Might the Corona virus just target Obesity. 

Obesity as the Leading indicator of death NOT as the Last of a short list of CoMorbidities.

Obesity, Heart Disease, Cancer, Respiratory Disease . . .


PS: The President knows this.  He was at a press conference 3 weeks ago citing how terrible the disease is.  He said something like "I have a friend with the virus.  One day he is fine 3 days later he is in a coma on a ventilator.  It's vicious . . He was a little heavy . . but its terrrible."  He knows.

---------
Reuters on Obesity:
“This virus is terrible, it can hit young people, in particular obese young people. Those who are overweight really need to be careful,” Delfraissy told France info radio.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-france-confinement/obesity-is-major-covid-19-risk-factor-says-french-chief-epidemiologist-idUSKBN21Q0S7

World Obesity at Risk with BMI >> 25
 “Given the extremely high rates of obesity around the globe we expect that a high percentage of the population who will contract coronavirus will also have a BMI over 25.”
https://www.worldobesity.org/news/statement-coronavirus-covid-19-obesity

Doctors on Obesity (in Connecticut):
Dr. John Morton who heads up Bariatric Surgery with Yale Medicine explains, “There’s something called hypoventilation syndrome and that is when you have extra tissue around your chest.  It’s harder to take deep breaths.”
Obesity also increases the risk for health issues such as diabetes and high blood pressure.
https://www.wtnh.com/news/health/coronavirus/what-you-need-to-know-about-obesity-and-covid-19/

Scott Pelley: Have you found a common denominator for why some patients crash so precipitously?

Dr. Mangala Narasimhan: We do think that there's some trends towards obesity, that patients who are obese seem to do-- worse and men definitely more than women.

Forward to 9:15 in the Report here:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-york-city-coronavirus-epicenter-united-states-peak-60-minutes-2020-03-29/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 11, 2020, 09:35:19 AM
The model presented in this tool has a 95% uncertainty interval and is represented by the shaded area(s) on each chart.[/b][/size]

This really pisses me off.  I work to make sure my reports are near 100% perfect.  There are a few small math issues with running totals and averages based upon how the data comes in but I would be willing to say my data is 98%+ accurate with regards to the source vs. 95% wrong.  Holy Moly.

Hi Beasho,

They are talking about the unreliable nature of the underlying data itself, not internal errors in their reports or math issues.  Testing data, start dates, etc.  It is a real mess.  Data is never perfect but this is really remarkably bad. 

To make that even more notable, that is without any changes to any of the parameters.  That is a different issue altogether.  Change (for instance) the value given to distancing and that would be an entirely different model snapshot.   



Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 11, 2020, 10:56:23 AM
^ Thanks Admin.


I’m hoping for a 30% infection rate in CA right now as I type. It might not be there but a guy can hope.

Prevalence in Germany at ~15%.  Dr. Attia's spreadsheet was an eye opener for me - valuable info for a layperson like myself as the US moves forward with testing.   

https://youtu.be/FxA2-vl9kdw
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 11, 2020, 06:07:55 PM
^ Examples of the numbers he mentioned early in the video.

Also, 15% and 30% at the numbers in his POC kit.   

 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 12, 2020, 11:58:21 AM

There may be a link to people who suffer from hypertension.

Found this for NY while searching for deaths by age group, but not sure if it exists on a national level.  Breaks out the comorbidities as well as age groups

https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Fatalities

More data on CoMorbidity and it is practically hidden.  I had to stitch together 3 Screen shots to put this view together.  I am not kidding you can NOT see this view anywhere.  You have to scroll through 3 rows at a time.

81% of Deaths in NY listed as CoMorbid.

Yet again numbers Closer to 100% than even 50% EVERYWHERE YOU TURN.  Obesity is NOT listed as a CoMorbidity.

Whoops Data updated.  Now NY is showing 88% CoMorbid related Deaths. 

I woke up this morning and read some articles that relating Covid-19 to the Spanish Flu.  NO COMPARISON!

Anyone suggesting this is like the Spanish flu is trying to push an agenda or terrorize.  Other than Social Isolation and wearing Masks the two diseases are like comparing basketball to sewing.

1)   The Spanish Flu killed Healthy people age 20 to 30.
2)   Covid-19 is Killing Obese People with CoMorbidites Age 75+
3)   Young people are Not Dying who are not Obese or CoMorbid.  They are safer by a factor of 10X to 50X than from common influenza
4)   The Spanish Flu killed between 50 and 100 Million people
5)   Covid-19 will not likely kill 1% as many people as the Spanish flu.

The following graphic shows the age of fatalities comparing the 1918 Pandemic vs. Covid-19 as measured by the State of NY midnight April 11th.  Representing nearly 10% of the World’s deaths the data shows a Peak Age group = 70-79 years.  The Spanish flu attacked young healthy people age 20 to 30.  In NY State the most recent data showed 88% of the Case Fatalities involved CoMorbidity.  NY does NOT list Obesity as a Comorbid condition which could push the number closer to 100%.


Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: all~wet on April 12, 2020, 01:10:50 PM
@Beasho- Appreciate the raw data. 

Whether it is over dramatizing and sensationalizing to prop up an agenda / scare people into complicity or minimizing what is really going on to provide false comfort or promote self interest- most of the info we are fed is at best being manipulated or just plain inaccurate.

Quite refreshing and useful to treat people as adults- enable everyone to see unvarnished truth/unfiltered numbers and let them be the judge. Most of the time, you shine light on- take a good long look in the face of most of our fears- they lose a good bit of thier steam.  Anyway- thanks for the tool to do that with updated numbers.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: lucabrasi on April 12, 2020, 10:24:24 PM
Thanks for taking the time to post all this Beesho.

I saw this thread and damn if I was going to look at it...…...and didn't till today.
Looked through the first 3 or so pages and the last 3 or so......going to go through it all sometime soon.
I had literally (yes, literally) terrified myself for a week or so....would not watch any news and barely peaked at online news for a bit as well.
Pretty much stayed away from anything covid.
It's real shit...but...….

Been wondering about a few of the "things" in here....and just wondering.
some random thoughts/observations.

Saw some mass grave in NY. It's used for no next of kin/unkown like people.
I saw a stat that said usually 25 a week. Up to 24 a day here recently. How long, how often, etc....I don't know but happening "now". Think it was linked to the bbc. I read a few sentences.

Drones in Savannah Georgia doing the social distancing legwork for law enforcement. Something like out of some futuristic movie.

I see the "California had it earlier" gaining traction. People around here have really wondered the same thing for a few weeks. Vegas as well I hear.

There is an article in The New Yorker on Sun Valley. Not a bad skim.

Blaine County was coming out with high numbers when testing kicked in. It had flattened out (I think) last I noticed but was still off from rest of state/country=per capita cases.
Roughly 23,00 people and 452 cases. (Idaho was one of the last states to report any cases)
Perfect breeding dish...gondolos, trams, lines all over, crowded bars and restraunts…..
I'm sure there are lots of differences in the proportion of tests given and all sorts of other stuff....

Anyways, lot's of people in Teton County think it was here in January as well. Vegas as well I hear.
I had been curious about the resort areas and the cases in those areas so I looked some up by their counties.

Jackson Hole = same population (53)
Steamboat = same population (36)
Vail = twice as big (452)
Park City = twice as big (68)
Aspen = 3/4 smaller (49)
Crested Butte = 3/4 smaller (101)
Mammoth = smallest of them all at 14,000 (21)
Vegas = 2,000,000 (2,813)

Have no clue what any of that means or if it means anything, especially with all the differences in the amount of tests done, this, that, and everything else about all this...….but I had been wondering about resort areas and how they were faring and what they were seeing,

Be curious to see these antibody tests done on the people who thought they had it earlier in the year.
I know NYC and it's world travelers, it's density, etc. etc. but I think California and Vegas would have had as much exposure to something like this just as early. Vegas has got to be just as bad of a breeding dish as anywhere else in the US.

I knew the numbers would be skewed cuz of the testing and well, all sorts of stuff.
I knew they would go off the charts at some point because of the testing.....
and I still scared the shit out of myself.

Ya'll ever hear of Doctor Steve or his show Weird Medicine?
He's on all that social media stuff.
A sane voice out there.

Thanks again for taking the time to post this Beesho.
I knew it would be.....what it is...a place to get good info....I just couldn't look till today.
Be interesting to see how it has evolved....


 

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 13, 2020, 06:46:59 PM
 Maui is getting a bit weird.

Here's an Oahu doctor that has organised a team of volunteers to come to the smaller islands and test.  Feds and State seem to be mired in the mud.  His comments are not what we want to hear about our hospital management.  It seems they have been lying to staff about "No PPE available"  This doctor called 'em out.  Petitions are starting.  I'm hoping Tulsi 'heads on pikes' Gabbard takes a swing, with a flamethrower.   

https://mauinow.com/2020/04/12/video-dr-scott-miscovich-shares-front-line-view-of-covid-19-testing-in-maui-county/

Two more videos up on testing.

https://youtu.be/QmcnWqsVfdg

https://youtu.be/kgzFAdYwYLM

 

   
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: WaveWashed Hatteras on April 13, 2020, 07:55:16 PM
The model presented in this tool has a 95% uncertainty interval and is represented by the shaded area(s) on each chart.[/b][/size]

This really pisses me off.  I work to make sure my reports are near 100% perfect.  There are a few small math issues with running totals and averages based upon how the data comes in but I would be willing to say my data is 98%+ accurate with regards to the source vs. 95% wrong.  Holy Moly.

Hi Beasho,

They are talking about the unreliable nature of the underlying data itself, not internal errors in their reports or math issues.  Testing data, start dates, etc.  It is a real mess.  Data is never perfect but this is really remarkably bad. 

To make that even more notable, that is without any changes to any of the parameters.  That is a different issue altogether.  Change (for instance) the value given to distancing and that would be an entirely different model snapshot.

I stumbled onto this thread and started reading it in reverse when I saw the exchange above.   Is this tongue in cheek sarcasm between Admin and Beasho or do those two really not understand how accurate a 95% uncertainty level represents?  If I missed the intent I apologize in advance.   

If for example a manufacturer said that it's new 14' Raceboard was guaranteed to have a dry weight of 14.3kg +/- 0.2kg with a 95% uncertainty then out of a production run of 100 boards the following would be true.   68 boards would weigh between 14.2 and 14.4 kg, 95 boards would weigh between 14.1 and 14.5kg and 99.7 would weigh between 14.1 and 14.5 kg.   Except for the constants of nature one would never achieve 100% accuracy.    These confidence levels or uncertainty levels only apply when the sample set is Gaussian.  In this case does the glasser use the corrrect ratio of resin to cloth?    The statement 95% uncertainty does not indicate that only 5 out of 100 boards would be in the 14.1 to 14.5 kg range.

This thread seems to be arguing, and I fully agree with argument, that Bayesian probability needs to be employed to understand this virus.   Take the simple example below;

"A patient goes to see a doctor. The doctor performs a test with 99 percent reliability--that is, 99 percent of people who are sick test positive and 99 percent of the healthy people test negative. The doctor knows that only 1 percent of the people in the country are sick. Now the question is: if the patient tests positive, what are the chances the patient is sick?"     The intuitive answer is 99 percent,

but the correct answer is 50 percent...."    Only one out of 100 patients is actually sick, the test gets every 100th result wrong.   Combine them and the risk of the getting a false result is just a coin flip.   

This virus is not killing indiscriminately, other factors are having a huge influence on the outcome of the few are carriers.   Explaining this concept to the masses is more difficult than ensuring the few who read this post understand the general terms used in typical probability statements.  We should be happy that even though these comorbidity numbers are not in the mainstream they are being published and available for anyone who searches.   We are lucky to live in a country that is so open to providing scientific results to its people via the web, even if the talking heads in the media don't take the time to report them.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 13, 2020, 10:18:47 PM
Tip of the hat to WaveWashedHatteras, Beasho and Admin for your input.  All of you have a better grasp on the math than I do.  I'm just tagging along, hoping to learn a thing or two.

The youtube link I posted on the 11th seems to have gone away.  Here it is again.

https://youtu.be/d2z73eTFvTM

I've also inserted 1% prevalence, 99% specificity and 99% sensitivity into Dr. Attia's spreadsheet, simply as a thought exercise to go along with WWH's post. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 14, 2020, 01:39:00 AM
I stumbled onto this thread and started reading it in reverse when I saw the exchange above.   Is this tongue in cheek sarcasm between Admin and Beasho or do those two really not understand how accurate a 95% uncertainty level represents?  If I missed the intent I apologize in advance.   

Hi Wavewashed,

They make it easy for us.  The IMHE posted the definition below and gave us a chart (and have represented uncertainty in the huge shaded area).

The shaded areas that they mention in their definition currently shows a potential USA death range between 180,000 people and 30,000 people.  150,000 deaths is a huge range of uncertainty.  The quote that I had posted (pasted again below) from the IMHE sums it up nicely in terms that anyone can easily understand.  They include that definition and explanation on every one of their charts.

Also worth noting that when we discussed this originally the IMHE projected deaths in the USA had been lowered to 60,000.  The projected US deaths have now been raised back up to 69,000 by August 4th.  That is again assuming full social distancing through May 2020.


"Shaded area indicates uncertainty"

"Uncertainty is the range of values that is likely to include the correct projected estimate for a given data category. Larger uncertainty intervals can result from limited data availability, small studies, and conflicting data, while smaller uncertainty intervals can result from extensive data availability, large studies, and data that are consistent across sources.  The model presented in this tool has a 95% uncertainty interval and is represented by the shaded area(s) on each chart."


COVID-19 projections assuming full social distancing through May 2020
Last updated April 13, 2020 (Pacific Time).
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 14, 2020, 07:19:48 AM
Tip of the hat to WaveWashedHatteras, Beasho and Admin for your input.  All of you have a better grasp on the math than I do.  I'm just tagging along, hoping to learn a thing or two. . . .
The youtube link I posted on the 11th seems to have gone away.  Here it is again.

https://youtu.be/d2z73eTFvTM


I went to this guys website (Peter Attia) and downloaded the spreadsheet.  I have to admit it is making my hair hurt.   

I feel like my wife and kids when they say

"Dad I have no idea what your are talking about . .  no one understands your graphs and you're just saying blah, blah, blah . . $&^%^&&^"

I respond "But it is so obvious." 

Clearly not obvious.

On this link is a great podcast by Amash Adalja.  He is super level headed speaks what I would consider the unvarnished truth and concludes that the fatality rate is like 0.3% to at most 1.0%. 

Me speaking - We are lucky because this was a dry run at what could be much worse.

https://peterattiamd.com/covid-19/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: WaveWashed Hatteras on April 14, 2020, 10:15:53 AM
I stumbled onto this thread and started reading it in reverse when I saw the exchange above.   Is this tongue in cheek sarcasm between Admin and Beasho or do those two really not understand how accurate a 95% uncertainty level represents?  If I missed the intent I apologize in advance.   


The shaded areas that they mention in their definition currently shows a potential USA death range between 180,000 people and 30,000 people.  150,000 deaths is a huge range of uncertainty.  The quote that I had posted (pasted again below) from the IMHE sums it up nicely in terms that anyone can easily understand.  They include that definition and explanation on every one of their charts.


When I read your post it seems like you understand Uncertainty but then when you comment that 150,000 deaths is a huge range I wonder if there is complete understanding of how this data is presented.   Numbers are fun, lets play some statistics game with them.
IMHE says 30,000 to 180,000 with 95% uncertainty, this is not a Gaussian distribution since the number of deaths can't be negative, but the projection is in the second third of the projection, or fairly weighted.   The best part of uncertainty is that there is an equal probability of any outcome in the model.,   e.g unlike Vegas where the house has the advantage on the roulette wheel with the 0 and 00 spaces, the IMHE model gives an equal chance to every value between 30,000 and 180,000.   We can be optimists or pessimists when viewing these projects but the math says either outcome or any in-between outcome is equally likely.

Let's use a real number set from https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america (https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america)  projected for May 1

51,405 deaths with 95% uncertainty that this number will be between  28,282 and 112,584   
 
lets do a simple conversion to 99.7%

51,405 deaths with 99.7% uncertainty that this number will be between 16,721 and 153,047

the last conversion would be for 68%

51,405 deaths with 68% uncertainty that this number will be between 40,000 and 60,000  ( I rounded here for simplicity)

Again equal likelihood based on stated uncertainty of any value within the range occurring.  So since today's actual reported death toll is 22,000 the model is flawed as the 99.7% estimate is low.  One would expect that actual value would not be lower than the estimated value. My guess is that as we progress in time that IMHE will be modifying their estimates as new data is collected.     Since I'm a scientist in the spectroscopy field and not infectious diseases I need to find some perspective to determine if these uncertainties are in fact "quite huge" or actually normal.   Looking at the CDC website and their projected death rate for Influenza in the USA for Winter/Spring 2019/2020 they listed an estimate of 24,000 to 62,000 deaths with a 95% uncertainty were expected.   They note that these numbers were generated from a pool of data that represents 8.5% of the US population (~27 million people)   So the CDC has a sample pool that is many magnitudes larger than the world wide Covid19 pool and has been studying this disease extensively for the past 60 years and the best guess of deaths has a  range of 38,000.   For a novel virus like SARS V2 with near zero historical references, a death estimate with a range of 150,000 or only 3x that of  one of the most highly studies infectious diseases in the world does not seem unreasonably large.

Now take into account China under reported deaths, rumors are putting the actual Chinese death toll between 20,000 and 1,000,000 and our estimates don't seem out of line.  Then consider that if 62,000 Americans had died of the flu in the period from November to today, not a single bit of the economy would have been shuttered, I'd be competing in the OBX-Wind Long Distance and Slalom races this week, and life would be going on as normal, instead of social distancing on the farm for the past two + weeks.   Current flu deaths for USA are in the 23,000 range and current CoVID19 in the 22,000 range, for a total of 45,000 which is approximately the Mid Point of the CDC Flu estimate ( 43,000 +/- 20,000 K=2) Every death is tragic, but in the big picture we're having a relatively mild Influenza season and must be doing something right to be keeping our CoVID19 numbers so low. 

This thread's deep analysis is what I wish I'd be viewing on the mainstream media's news reports, not something buried in a Standup zone forum.   

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on April 14, 2020, 11:53:37 AM
Thanks wavewashed, I wrote a similar comment but didn't post it because I chickened out on defending my generally weak understanding of statistical math. I have to retake the Kahn Academy math classes every few years to recharge my understanding since it's so fragile (and my memory is so bad) that anything I don't use disappears.

One of the problems is the replacement of the term "Confidence" with "Uncertainty". The meaning of the terms is the same. Saying 95% uncertainty does NOT mean that the error band is 95 percent. It literally means that 95 times out of a hundred the actual number will be within the error band. The problem here is that the term "uncertainty" (or confidence if you like that better) is being used without the error band.

If your data sucks you make the error band wide enough to have 95% uncertainty (confidence) and determining that is just math. 95% uncertainty is generally the gold standard for data analysis. A higher confidence level does not necessarily mean better data, it often means that the error band is wider for a given set. No one says 100 percent confidence unless they are full of shit or the error band encompasses all possible outcomes, including "we get hit by an asteroid".
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 14, 2020, 01:41:20 PM
...and we know that the data for this new virus has all of the issues that IMHE noted can result in larger uncertainty intervals.  I thought that the IMHE definition and graphic was great but I certainly appreciate the additions.

Every death is tragic, but in the big picture we're having a relatively mild Influenza season and must be doing something right to be keeping our CoVID19 numbers so low. 

The alternate perspective would be that even with a country shut down for 2.5 months, the IMHE is estimating 69,000 deaths on top of whatever the yet to be determined flu #'s end up being.

(https://www.cdc.gov/flu/images/about/burden/influenza-burden-chart2-960px.jpg)
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Chan on April 14, 2020, 03:19:06 PM
Today alone, the total national deaths will surpass the highest weekly deaths during last years flu season.  Many of the models, and most experts, are predicting a steep drop soon but adding to the uncertainty is the fundamental challenge of predicting human behavior.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 15, 2020, 01:00:10 PM
A few interesting updates from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ .    Someone had posted a link to this site and it is really interesting for watching the management of some of these issues in near real time.

April 15th (incomplete)

23310 new cases and 1819 new deaths in the United States
New York Governor Cuomo: "we will begin reporting all categories of fatalities pursuant to new CDC guidelines and are contacting facilities to get updated numbers" There may be additional people who died that have not been counted because not in a hospital

April 14th

26945 new cases and 2407 new deaths in the United States
New York City today has reported 3,778 additional deaths that have occurred since March 11 and have been classified as "probable," defined as follows: “decedent [...] had no known positive laboratory test for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) but the death certificate lists as a cause of death “COVID-19” or an equivalent" [https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/]. We will add these to the New York State total as soon as it is determined whether the historical distribution can be obtained
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 15, 2020, 01:19:59 PM
Thanks Admin. 

Interesting article from CIDRAP this morning. 
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/antibody-tests-may-hold-clues-covid-19-exposure-immunity-its-complicated

I copied/pasted and plugged their numbers into Dr. Attia's spreadsheet.  Interesting to me that the PPV rises with the prevalence.  I inserted 5, 15 and 30%. 

Dr. Attia's serologic test he's been using (for the past 4 weeks, he deleted the video. (?)), are upthread.  80 and 99%. 
Copy/pasted from the CIDRAP article:
----------------------------------------------------------
According to Cellex, the test was 93.8% sensitive in testing on 128 samples from Chinese COVID-19 patients confirmed by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), and 96.4% specific.

Those impressive-looking numbers, though still leave the possibility of a significant number of people having false-positive and false-negative tests. For example, if 5% of the US population actually had the virus, a test with 95% sensitivity and 95% specificity conducted in a million people would correctly detect 47,500 cases, along with 2,500 false-negatives (those who were infected but were missed).

But it would also produce 47,500 false-positives. That means that if you were to test positive, there would be only a 50% chance that you actually had the virus and have some immunity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 15, 2020, 02:48:54 PM
I went to this guys website (Peter Attia) and downloaded the spreadsheet.  I have to admit it is making my hair hurt.   

I feel like my wife and kids when they say

"Dad I have no idea what your are talking about . .  no one understands your graphs and you're just saying blah, blah, blah . . $&^%^&&^"

I respond "But it is so obvious." 

Clearly not obvious.

As a math novice, it's comforting that the spreadsheet may have elicited a bit of uncertainty on your part.  I'll just keep plugging other peoples numbers into other peoples spreadsheets...  Go science!   
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 15, 2020, 04:26:52 PM
OK, you guys are way over my head, but you may find this data model interesting from the CDC, take a look.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR065pbyShNfBLvyH0bjzdCjQtmmbXwjuCBCE0VPdOaf1FX3Hg4TwzPJGVY

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 15, 2020, 08:06:35 PM
OK, you guys are way over my head, but you may find this data model interesting from the CDC, take a look.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR065pbyShNfBLvyH0bjzdCjQtmmbXwjuCBCE0VPdOaf1FX3Hg4TwzPJGVY

OK This is Pretty Earth Shattering!!!!

I am still sharpening my pencil but according to this CDC Website:  Since Feb 1st 73,000 Fewer People have died in the US vs. Expected Numbers (I assume Expected come from Forecasted Deaths by Month). 

Checking Numbers: 631K / 11 Weeks = 57.4K per Week * 52 Weeks = 2.98MM per year.

As of today there were 26,819 Deaths from Covid-19.  This means that 99,880 fewer people died that WOULD have otherwise died because of COVID-19.

Net Deaths DOWN by 73,000 Year Over Year because of Lock-down (???).  Almost 100,000 people otherwise SAVED because of Shelter in Place. 

Please check my numbers. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 15, 2020, 08:12:27 PM
I will circle back on this BUT if true the result would be better than my ZERO net deaths theory. 

It is NEGATIVE net deaths from Covid-19.  26K people Died of Covid-19 but 100K were otherwise spared.

NEGATIVE NET DEATHS.  For every 1 person that dies of Covid-19 4 People were otherwise saved.

Can this be true?!
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: justsomeguy on April 15, 2020, 09:18:38 PM
I will circle back on this BUT if true the result would be better than my ZERO net deaths theory. 

It is NEGATIVE net deaths from Covid-19.  26K people Died of Covid-19 but 100K were otherwise spared.

NEGATIVE NET DEATHS.  For every 1 person that dies of Covid-19 4 People were otherwise saved.

Can this be true?!

Data is good, but it's purpose is to help us make decisions ... So lets say it is true ... maybe it's not 4 to 1, maybe it's only 2 to 1... either way, lets run with that for a bit ... starting with, so what decisions should our leadership make based on that?

Do we keep our foot on the brake and continue a conservative path and drag out re-starting our economy (already in a very tenious position)? ... or do we ease off on the brakes a bit and initiate a faster re-start of the nation by smartly re-opening businesses, sending people back to work, re-starting national air travel ... basically let businesses and individuals get that stimulus money moving, while only applying the brakes enough to prevent sliding off the road and ending up in the ditch again.

Of course the medical/health/science aspects also need to be urgently pursued (testing, vaccine, prevention), but it could be a 2 pronged parallel effort vs. a serial delayed effort that could leave all of the living in dire straights.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: peterp on April 15, 2020, 11:57:31 PM
Murder and traffic deaths are down by over 30% in South Africa due to lockdown. That translates into 40+ lives saved everyday (=840 after 21 days of lockdown). Covid-19 has claimed 34 deaths TOTAL as of this morning......Covid-19 is saving lives (+800 so far).
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 16, 2020, 03:35:25 AM
It is valuable to compare to where we would be without mitigation.  Here is a graph that was presented by the Trump administration earlier this month:

(https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/2YYJX6DTWQI6VLM3EVHMTGMTXQ.jpg&w=1440)
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 16, 2020, 04:33:21 AM
Concerning current status and mitigation efforts by country:

The US has 22% of the world's Covid-19 deaths with 4% of the world's population.

The US currently has 31,000 deaths and the deaths per day is still increasing.  The deaths from the data error (from a few posts up) are now being added back in to the past few days which had signaled a possible top.  It is also worth noting that most of those deaths have been lumped onto one day while they actually were spread more evenly among days since the 11th.  These kind of errors are where smoothing (rolling averages) becomes important.

New York is now at 14,000 deaths.  This is higher than all but two countries. 


Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 16, 2020, 05:41:59 AM
I will circle back on this BUT if true the result would be better than my ZERO net deaths theory. 

It is NEGATIVE net deaths from Covid-19.  26K people Died of Covid-19 but 100K were otherwise spared.

NEGATIVE NET DEATHS.  For every 1 person that dies of Covid-19 4 People were otherwise saved. [/b]

Can this be true?!

I couldn't sleep on this one.  And woke up reading fine print.  CDC Data is rolling on Deaths it will keep getting revised so we'll have to keep watching it.  There may be some or even more than all truth to it.   But Admin's posts also woke me up. 

Yes single day death toll highest ever.  We had been tracking at ~ 2,000 per day and then dropping to 1,500.  But Today SPIKE.  This is materially bad. 

Bad for the summer.   Bad for the proverbial Hurricane forecast cone. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 16, 2020, 05:52:29 AM
US Death Spike.  Admin also referred to this above. 

Data catch-up or Horror Show? 

Italy shown in Second Chart.  The US had been following this exact same course until today.

US Accounts for 3.6% of all Deaths for All Time in One Day from Covid-19. 

Full Model:
https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: mrbig on April 16, 2020, 07:30:45 AM
It looks like the countries with the highest test rates for entire populations are faring better especially when combined with restrictions on movement.

Scared that opening for business before June at the earliest is going to be horrible.

Hope I am wrong.

Beasho - thanks so much for your model and observations..
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Area 10 on April 16, 2020, 08:31:00 AM
There is evidence that economic recession, at least in the short term, *improves* health and mortality rates *decrease*:

http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/C_Ruhm_Are_2000.pdf

So this is some of what you may be seeing here.

Suicides however go up.

Modern life is bad for you :)

Nations with lowest rates of obesity, and with the most integrated and easily accessible health and welfare systems, and (probably) the least divided and most prescient governments, will presumably fare best in this crisis.

In the UK we are seeing the start of a worrying trend where deaths among people *without* CV19 are increasing, relative to baseline. This coincides with many hospital departments that are not busy with CV19 being unusually quiet. The assumption is that many people who would have otherwise have sought medical care for non-CV19 related causes are now not seeking help, perhaps because they think that if they go to hospital they will catch CV19 and it will prove a death sentence. A more charitable possibility is that people who have health conditions are "suffering in silence" because they do not want to overwhelm our National Healthcare System (NHS), which is a source of national pride in our country: healthcare free at the point of delivery for all, regardless of your economic situation. So at the moment we actually have many hospital wards with staff sitting around with very little to do, while those of course dealing with CV19 are very busy.

What is happening in the hospitals though is almost just a distraction: There are only 120k hospital beds in the UK, but there are almost 4x that many people living in care homes (mostly elderly folk who can't look after themselves), who are by-and-large the most vulnerable to this. So CV19 will probably sweep though our care home system, and then by far the greatest numbers of deaths will occur in that sector.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: mrbig on April 16, 2020, 09:39:18 AM
News flash. UK will wait until June before reopening. No double top rebound.

We need to fix our testing debacle first. Unlikely. Many will die..
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 16, 2020, 09:49:58 AM
Agreed.  Testing, testing and more testing. 

My massage therapist has been on the edge of a strange illness for almost a month now.  She's highly educated in western pharmacology and Ayurvedic.  She's going to be ok.  I can't imagine the stress of having various symptoms appear and disappear over weeks.  Not enough to go to the doctor, yet she knows she has something.  She's very in tune with her body.  This bug is like nothing she's ever experienced.  She hasn't been tested for Covid but has had G.I. symptoms, very mild chest stuff off and on, no fever, mild flu symptoms.  This is a sneaky bug. 

We need testing, testing and more testing.

  https://www.medpagetoday.org/infectiousdisease/covid19/85973?vpass=1
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 16, 2020, 12:59:27 PM
I have been screaming about CoMorbidity since I saw the statistics 3 weeks ago out of China then confirmed by Bloomberg in Italy and the data from Imperial College.  All 100% aligned on the risk to PRIOR HEALTH CONDITIONS.

Then on Sunday 60 Minutes was reporting and the doctor said "We see a high correlation with Obesity." BMI > than 40 is listed as Morbid Obesity.  And there it was the word again.

Obesity.  Might the Corona virus just target Obesity. 

Obesity as the Leading indicator of death NOT as the Last of a short list of CoMorbidities.

Obesity, Heart Disease, Cancer, Respiratory Disease . . .


Scott Pelley: Have you found a common denominator for why some patients crash so precipitously?

Dr. Mangala Narasimhan: We do think that there's some trends towards obesity, that patients who are obese seem to do-- worse and men definitely more than women.

Forward to 9:15 in the Report here:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-york-city-coronavirus-epicenter-united-states-peak-60-minutes-2020-03-29/

The New York Times is finally catching up:

"Obesity may be one of the most important predictors of severe coronavirus illness, new studies say."

“Obesity’s link to chronic diseases is well known, but the experience with H1N1 influenza in 2009 revealed that people with obesity are also more vulnerable to infectious diseases.”

“Of the 14 Covid-19 patients recently in Dr. Sanam Ahmed’s critical care unit at Mount Sinai on the Upper East Side, she said, 12 were at least 50 years old and had complex medical problems. The two younger patients, who were in their 30s, had obesity and no other diseases.”

Article here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/16/health/coronavirus-obesity-higher-risk.html
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on April 16, 2020, 01:42:50 PM
Agreed.  Testing, testing and more testing. 

My massage therapist has been on the edge of a strange illness for almost a month now.  She's highly educated in western pharmacology and Ayurvedic.  She's going to be ok.  I can't imagine the stress of having various symptoms appear and disappear over weeks.  Not enough to go to the doctor, yet she knows she has something.  She's very in tune with her body.  This bug is like nothing she's ever experienced.  She hasn't been tested for Covid but has had G.I. symptoms, very mild chest stuff off and on, no fever, mild flu symptoms.  This is a sneaky bug. 

We need testing, testing and more testing.

  https://www.medpagetoday.org/infectiousdisease/covid19/85973?vpass=1


LaPerouseBay,

Just curious to know if your massage therapist is still practicing? My massage therapist had to shut down and it is the one service I’m really missing. My back is not the same without her!
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 16, 2020, 03:47:25 PM
^Her business on hold.  She has a group of "regulars" on Maui.  She's isolating due to the weird bug she may have.  All of her snowbirds are gone.  Personally, I'm doing fine without the usual two week tuneup.  I'll be on my best behavior.  If I get lazy and set something crooked - she's merciless.  That's why we love her so much...  The little old ladies can take the most pain.  Her boyfriend is built like a brick shithouse.  He's the biggest wimp of all...   :) 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 16, 2020, 11:45:28 PM
The video I linked on the 11th (removed from Youtube) has been replaced with this document.

https://peterattiamd.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Copy-of-Testing-update-30Mar2020.pdf   

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 17, 2020, 08:59:22 AM
US Death Spike.  Admin also referred to this above. 

Data catch-up or Horror Show? 

Italy shown in Second Chart.  The US had been following this exact same course until today.

US Accounts for 3.6% of all Deaths for All Time in One Day from Covid-19. 

Full Model:
https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9

Yesterday I was worried this was a data anomaly. 

None of the major networks reporting the spike in Death count. 

I DO think it was a catch up but here is the Wall Street Journal reporting the news ONE day late. 

From April 17th: 12:04 am

https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-surges-in-some-asian-countries-that-had-been-lightly-hit-11587031743

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Area 10 on April 17, 2020, 09:35:33 AM
News flash. UK will wait until June before reopening. No double top rebound.

We need to fix our testing debacle first. Unlikely. Many will die..
The US death rate from CV19 (number of deaths per million population) is perhaps only about half of what it is in the UK at this point, and as far as the data allows us to know. So the US doesn’t seem to be doing so badly so far?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 17, 2020, 10:55:41 AM

The US death rate from CV19 (number of deaths per million population) is perhaps only about half of what it is in the UK at this point, and as far as the data allows us to know. So the US doesn’t seem to be doing so badly so far?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

The US was at 10 deaths per million at the beginning of the month and is at 101 today.  New York is at over 770 deaths per million.  That is almost 4 times the deaths per million of the UK.  We have a lot of regions that are just now starting to see big losses. 

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: ninja tuna on April 17, 2020, 11:05:51 AM
interesting study

https://townhall.com/columnists/marinamedvin/2020/04/15/israeli-professor-shows-virus-follows-fixed-pattern-n2566915
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Night Wing on April 17, 2020, 01:37:39 PM
interesting study

https://townhall.com/columnists/marinamedvin/2020/04/15/israeli-professor-shows-virus-follows-fixed-pattern-n2566915

I'm finding the comments after the article most interesting to read also.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 17, 2020, 01:53:30 PM
Wait a minute. Mr. Israeli Professor says
Quote
His graphs show that all countries experienced seemingly identical coronavirus infection patterns, with the number of infected peaking in the sixth week and rapidly subsiding by the eighth week.


if you look at California, with a population 40 million  vs Michigan with a population of 10 million their infection patterns show that at teir peak, California had 93 deaths per day and Michigan has 200 deaths per day.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/california

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/michigan

I really don't see the as experiencing identical patterns.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: LaPerouseBay on April 17, 2020, 02:14:36 PM
Go science!

https://youtu.be/2U4DAQ3kjRs
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 17, 2020, 02:45:58 PM
Here is another Interesting Angle. 

Homeless People Immune

A West Coast healthcare worker was asked about the impact to the homeless population the response was something like this:

"We know that those with pre-existing conditions are highest at risk (CoMorbid - my word not hers) but if those conditions like dementia were going to kill them from wandering into a street and getting hit by a bus then they would have already died. They are the hardened survivors of untreated conditions."

From Article below:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is now “actively looking into” results from universal COVID-19 testing at a Boston homeless shelter.  The broad-scale testing took place at the Pine Street Inn homeless shelter in Boston’s South End a week and a half ago because of a small cluster of cases there.  Of the 397 people tested, 146 people tested positive. Not a single one had any symptoms.

https://www.actionnewsjax.com/news/trending/coronavirus-cdc-reviewing-stunning-universal-testing-results-boston-homeless-shelter/ZADQ45HCAZEVJAZA3OTCUR7M6M/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Subber on April 17, 2020, 04:14:06 PM
Yup, it is interesting that we've not heard of any homeless dying from Corona Virus in Santa Cruz.

I am/was thinking they get lots of sun = lots of Vitamin D.

Also, in that LIGHT, this just in:

"Preliminary results from government lab experiments show that the coronavirus does not survive long in high temperatures and high humidity, and is QUICKLY DESTROYED BY SUNLIGHT, providing evidence fromcontrolled tests of what scientists believed — but had not yet proved — to be true."
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Area 10 on April 17, 2020, 06:00:44 PM

The US death rate from CV19 (number of deaths per million population) is perhaps only about half of what it is in the UK at this point, and as far as the data allows us to know. So the US doesn’t seem to be doing so badly so far?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

The US was at 10 deaths per million at the beginning of the month and is at 101 today.  New York is at over 770 deaths per million.  That is almost 4 times the deaths per million of the UK.  We have a lot of regions that are just now starting to see big losses.

Yeah but the vast majority of UK deaths have been in London. If you compared New York with London the contrast wouldn’t be anything like as big. Densely populated areas are going to get hit the hardest and earliest, for obvious reasons. You can’t compare data from New York with the data from all regions of the U.K. combined - you have to compare regions of similar density. Plus, the UK data on mortality rates is fatally flawed - it only includes deaths in hospitals. Yet around 50% of deaths will likely be occurring outside hospitals. So the actual number of people dying in the UK  is probably double what those statistics suggest.


Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 18, 2020, 09:19:54 AM
This disease appears to attack areas where people are predominantly inside. Nursing homes being the hardest hit due to the shared air and comorbidities.

Closing parks and beaches is going to turn out to be an unhealthy decision. Dumb opinion - The stay home order should be the stay outside order. More like the stay healthy order.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 18, 2020, 10:15:21 AM
This disease appears to attack areas where people are predominantly inside. Nursing homes being the hardest hit due to the shared air and comorbidities.

Closing parks and beaches is going to turn out to be an unhealthy decision. Dumb opinion - The stay home order should be the stay outside order. More like the stay healthy order.

This is consistent with another observation from SARS outbreak (or related) years ago.  From memory I had heard that the infection rates in 3rd world hospitals was terrible.  Bad unhealthy conditions.  2nd World hospitals (work with me) that had better hygienic practices and open air facitlities e.g. literally open windows for ventilation had better recovery and lower infection rates at care facilities.  The 1st world with modern internally circulated ventilation suffered from worse cross infection rates.  Not as bad as first world but something about the closed modern recirculated system was harmful. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on April 18, 2020, 11:47:06 AM
An interesting article on why all COVID models regarding the USA infection rate continue to be flawed, with some useful data that could be applied to get more realistic numbers: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/04/us-coronavirus-outbreak-out-control-test-positivity-rate/610132/

If the likely infected rate was reverse-engineered from the test positivity rate (the percentage of test results that are positive) the numbers could be better than just a pure guess. The positivity rates of countries where testing is done more broadly are about a factor of ten lower than the US rate. The positivity rate in the US is a little higher than 20 percent. New York has a positivity rate of 41 percent. South Korea, Australia, New Zealand--2 percent, Canada, Germany, Denmark 6 to 8 percent. Italy 15 percent. The UK is 30 percent. It might be possible to relate the positivity rate to the hospitalizations and death rate in each country and get a closer idea of what the true infection level is.

We could just guess that the infection rate is ten times the number of positives, but that's probably an underestimate. With 700,000 positives that sets the infection level at 7 million people and the fatality rate at .5 percent.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 18, 2020, 01:23:33 PM
Here's preliminary analysis of a recent Standford study.
 

 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01095-0

An analysis of the blood of some 3,300 people living in Santa Clara county in early April found that one in every 66 people had been infected with SARS-CoV-2. On the basis of that finding, the researchers estimate that between 48,000 and 82,000 of the county’s roughly 2 million inhabitants were infected with the virus at that time — numbers that contrast sharply with the official case count of some 1,000 people reported in early April, according to the analysis posted today on medRxiv. The work has not yet been peer reviewed.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on April 18, 2020, 06:46:11 PM
Wow, that's 2.4 to 4%. If that applied to the entire country it would be 8 million to 13 million infections and a death rate of .26 to .4 percent. I doubt it applies to the entire country though, and the numbers are odd. One in 66 is 1.5 percent. Using that number it's about 5,000,000 infected people and the death rate is .6 percent. My extended numbers are bullshit, of course, you'd need some statistical analysis to extend the sample into something representative of the population. It does, however, give a pretty clear picture that we need a lot more testing to understand what is going on and where.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 18, 2020, 09:33:19 PM
Cliff Mass is a weather expert also working for the University of WA where the IMHE models are made. He put together a nice blog with pictures and examples regarding being indoors as the exact wrong way to deal with the virus.

https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2020/04/why-outside-air-is-safe-and-park.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&m=1

MIT did a study as well showing that length of subway rides had a big impact on infection rates.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: ninja tuna on April 20, 2020, 05:06:16 AM
An article on Sweden, 

https://reason.com/2020/04/17/in-sweden-will-voluntary-self-isolation-work-better-than-state-enforced-lockdowns-in-the-long-run/
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: OkiWild on April 20, 2020, 05:37:20 AM
And then there's this study suggesting the number of people who've had it in Santa Clara County is 50-85 times higher than the PCR testing number, bringing the death rate down to 0.12% to 0.2% from over 4%.

Two larger studies are kicking off in the article, and I know the Japanese are firing up the same thing. We've long suspected that it's already taken a run at us, or that it's been here since late December.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/antibody-study-suggests-coronavirus-is-far-more-widespread-than-previously-thought (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/antibody-study-suggests-coronavirus-is-far-more-widespread-than-previously-thought)
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on April 20, 2020, 10:02:29 AM
People believe what they want to believe. The death rate in areas where the curve is flatter--whether naturally or because of restrictions--is much lower than the hot spots, because the hospitals are less stressed. I don't think anyone ever assumed the disease was going to be stopped by social distancing restrictions, just slowed so the healthcare facilities could keep up. And anyone who is reasonably numerate understood from day one that the actual infection rate was at least ten times higher than testing showed--because they only tested seriously ill people. I assumed it was at least a hundred times greater.

It's inevitable that people who have been protected by restrictions they dislike will ignore that effect when they look around and see no bodies in the streets.

Restraining an airborne infection to 3% of the population is not a natural effect. Take the same infection rate as seasonal flu and a .2% fatality rate and you have 4.6 million people dead. Stress the hospitals with that level of ICU care and the death rate goes well above 1%, which is north of 20 million people.

Yes, the fucked up testing skews the math, but you can take the same studies and the same european experience and project it to America and get your own numbers. Let me know if it comes out that a lot of people you know and care about won't be dead if we don't manage this response well.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: deepmud on April 20, 2020, 10:41:50 AM
Bill - you point about hospitals being available and deaths vs not - I think this is what I don't see people I know who, saying things like "Fuck it, I'm going under, just let us work" are missing? To restate it - it's the sudden exposure, and the load on our system, that makes this a big deal.
Am I missing it? Am I not explaining well? I'm trying to be a voice of reason to scared people I know (online and local) who are really desperate, and saying things like "Just let me risk it - I'm going under anyway". I'm trying to find a way to say this isn't just YOU playing Russian Roulette, you are advocating making everyone close to you play it WITH you.

I think it goes back to what I was reading in The Undoing Project - we just cannot grasp risk and big numbers. We have "numbers" but as you imply - we are guesstimating with 10 to 100 times SWAG ("scientific" wild ass guess). But  - how to explain that? I'm not getting anywhere against "I don't trust anything the media or government says". Like arguing with the wind.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 20, 2020, 11:30:46 AM
There will not be a vaccine available to the general population for at lease a year, probably a year and a half. Today, the doctors can only treat the symptoms until your natural system fights the disease, you may get better or you may die. But the good news is that there will probably be a cure for those that get it and it will available rather soon. This will happen one of two ways. First, they will find an available drug that is effective in fighting Covid19. The medical trials only have to prove that it is effective, which won't take too long. The second method is to develop a drug that is designed specifically for Covid19. They have had the dna mapped since February, so its not too hard to do. Here the trials will have to prove that it's effective, like the first solution, but also must prove that its side effects aren't too dangerous. This will take longer, but will be a better product. If you can hold of getting it by the end of summer, you'll be in good shape. If not, its a crap shoot how badly it will affect you. Remember, some healthy younger people are getting very very sick and no one yet knows why.

 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 21, 2020, 05:52:04 PM
OK, you guys are way over my head, but you may find this data model interesting from the CDC, take a look.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR065pbyShNfBLvyH0bjzdCjQtmmbXwjuCBCE0VPdOaf1FX3Hg4TwzPJGVY

Please check my numbers. . . .

I have checked my own numbers and have softened the perspective.  The United States is Currently Running Net Negative Deaths but this will get updated and stress the Net Negative Death theory in the coming weeks.

20,000 Fewer People have died in the United States through April 11, 2020 than Expected.

Said again “The United States through April 11th is living longer than Expected.”

The CDC released its Expected Deaths in the US ~ 57,100 per week. Death totals are updated daily. Weekly expectations were matched against the Covid-19 deaths as reported by WorldData in Red. These are running totals and will get updated 2 to 3 weeks later so the Blue bars will grow. I have truncated the last 2 weeks and NOT attempted to forecast the near-term outcome.

Data sources confirm that 90% to 99% of Deaths have been related to Comorbidities. Obesity and old age likely contribute to the remaining 99.9% of cases. Net Negative Deaths may not continue in the near term but over time will reflect the total impact of Covid-19 and Shelter in Place on the US Population.

Full Model here:
https://app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiNzExYmM2ZWQtZWVmMS00OTI1LWE1NzYtMTU2OTk3ZGE4ZjMyIiwidCI6IjQzODE2ODE2LTY0OTYtNDU4My1iMmVmLWU5Y2U3MTg1NjI4MCIsImMiOjF9&fbclid=IwAR2YPo6H0qPl4UoyYSHd_adTFzCBt7JKMzwVzMzh6p8631fqOlL_fRmLwDA
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on April 21, 2020, 06:29:14 PM
spooky article about the virus mechanisms. Dis ain't da flu: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/how-does-coronavirus-kill-clinicians-trace-ferocious-rampage-through-body-brain-toes

Don't read it if you're feeling down, DO read it if you're still convinced this is no worse than a cold that "goes down to your chest" as one dickhead on Facebook claimed.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Quickbeam on April 21, 2020, 09:31:51 PM
spooky article about the virus mechanisms. Dis ain't da flu: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/how-does-coronavirus-kill-clinicians-trace-ferocious-rampage-through-body-brain-toes

Don't read it if you're feeling down, DO read it if you're still convinced this is no worse than a cold that "goes down to your chest" as one dickhead on Facebook claimed.

Very good article. Thank you for posting.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Area 10 on April 22, 2020, 03:02:02 AM
I’ve already had my encounter with presumed CV19, and it’s definitely not like either a cold or a flu. There are such a wide variety of symptoms in different people, but I had the conventional respiratory symptoms, complete with pneumonia for a couple of days, a continuous cough that stopped me sleeping, shallow breathing, irregular heart beats etc. I was very glad that I am not obese and have maintained a reasonable level of fitness, because I could see how easily it could just overwhelm you. So if you haven’t had it yet, my advice would be to “get fit to fight the virus”. Maybe you’ll be one of the lucky ones who hardly notices anything. But you might be one of those who ends up requiring all the spare cardiopulmonary function they can muster.

I wonder when Trump will get it. He’s fat and in the danger zone age-wise. Biden might be at risk too. That could change things around for November. As soon as you lift the lockdown restrictions they will both be at much greater risk.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 22, 2020, 06:16:24 AM
spooky article about the virus mechanisms. Dis ain't da flu: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/how-does-coronavirus-kill-clinicians-trace-ferocious-rampage-through-body-brain-toes

Don't read it if you're feeling down, DO read it if you're still convinced this is no worse than a cold that "goes down to your chest" as one dickhead on Facebook claimed.

I was hopeful that this would be 'like the flu' but the numbers in Belgium, Spain, Italy . . . . are already at those death rates and there is no sign of slowdown . . . . yet.  Maybe this burns through the unlucky combination of 1) Comorbidity 2) Obesity 3) Bad-Luck Genetics fast.

I don't think that everyone with that combination is at risk.  We are survivors by definition and nature plays a statistical game.  This is my pet
Quick Burn through the Underbrush theory. 

If that is true we will not reach the numbers that Herd Immunity requires even with a fatality rate below 1%. 

Global Death Rates and then there is NY (4X Flu Death Rate), NJ, MI and LA.  Not good.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 22, 2020, 07:50:42 AM
... I am not obese and have maintained a reasonable level of fitness, because I could see how easily it could just overwhelm you. So if you haven’t had it yet, my advice would be to “get fit to fight the virus”. Maybe you’ll be one of the lucky ones who hardly notices anything. But you might be one of those who ends up requiring all the spare cardiopulmonary function they can muster.

...

Yes, this! This is what I have been preaching to the old people I know. Just assume C19 is unavoidable and the best way to ensure you live through it is to be prepared. I figure most of you on this board are in good shape, I mean if you are regularly taking waves on the head, you probably have some pretty good pulmonary function.

I WISH the powers that be could recognize that tougher people need less hospitalization. Sure there are outliers but if we are talking about models and statistics, this is provable. Limiting outdoor activity now that the curve has flattened is a mistake, outdoor activity should be a mandate.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: justsomeguy on April 22, 2020, 08:13:20 AM
Michael Osterholm telling it like it is (again) ... finally, CNN.com posts something worthwhile.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/opinions/bergen-osterholm-interview-two-opinion/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/opinions/bergen-osterholm-interview-two-opinion/index.html)
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 22, 2020, 08:57:08 AM
There's been several articles about under counted deaths. There's not even an agreement on who is counted as a C19 death or not. This is an interesting NY Times article.
 
25,000 Missing Deaths:
Tracking the True Toll of the Coronavirus Crisis

At least 25,000 more people have died during the coronavirus pandemic over the last month than the official Covid-19 death counts report, a review of mortality data in 11 countries shows — providing a clearer, if still incomplete, picture of the toll of the crisis.

In the last month, far more people died in these countries than in previous years, The New York Times found. The totals include deaths from Covid-19 as well as those from other causes, likely including people who could not be treated as hospitals became overwhelmed.

These numbers undermine the notion that many people who have died from the virus may soon have died anyway. In Paris, more than twice the usual number of people have died each day, far more than the peak of a bad flu season. In New York City, the number is now four times the normal amount.

Of course, mortality data in the middle of a pandemic is not perfect. The disparities between the official death counts and the total rise in deaths most likely reflect limited testing for the virus, rather than intentional undercounting. Officially, about 165,000 people have died worldwide of the coronavirus as of Tuesday.

But the total death numbers offer a more complete portrait of the pandemic, experts say, especially because most countries report only those Covid-19 deaths that occur in hospitals.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_NN_p_20200421&instance_id=17817&nl=morning-briefing&regi_id=123124401&section=topNews&segment_id=25631&te=1&user_id=1de94dbd8c722eed2380270ee571b043
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 22, 2020, 09:26:00 AM
But the total death numbers offer a more complete portrait of the pandemic, experts say, especially because most countries report only those Covid-19 deaths that occur in hospitals.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_NN_p_20200421&instance_id=17817&nl=morning-briefing&regi_id=123124401&section=topNews&segment_id=25631&te=1&user_id=1de94dbd8c722eed2380270ee571b043

This article is showing the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the CDC is reporting.  In the United States as a whole the Death total is DOWN by 18K through ~ April 4th.  But the Numbers are changing fast.  Even if there is a spike in the coming weeks, which is likely, you have to measure this continuously to see what the effect is for the entire year. 

There is a backlog of Net Negative Deaths running @ -2,000 to - 4,000 per week.  These will get consumed in the near term but at the end of time these numbers portray the net effect of Covid Big or Small.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 22, 2020, 09:40:39 AM
 Interesting. When I look closer I can see that the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden and Switzerland stared out with lower than average deaths per months for the first few months, Around March, deaths ramped up very quickly.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: digger71 on April 22, 2020, 10:55:53 AM
I think we have to assume death counts from many other countries are just wrong.  Ecuador even today is reporting just over 500 deaths but in Guayaquil alone they are ~6k above the annual average for the same time period.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-52329500
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 22, 2020, 10:59:14 AM
Number of lives saved by mitigation efforts.  That is the real number of interest.  It is so multi-factorial, though, that we will never get any kind of accurate read. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: SUP Leave on April 22, 2020, 11:57:18 AM
Number of lives saved by mitigation efforts.  That is the real number of interest.  It is so multi-factorial, though, that we will never get any kind of accurate read. 

Yes, that is the truth of it which we will not know for years and even then the results will be skewed. The secondary healthcare crisis is not looming anymore, but taking place currently. I'm kicking myself for my post above regarding this being a safe time as we are at net negative deaths- I made the common mistake of viewing it through my personal filter. It was safe for about a month, but other health factors area catching up now.

If I had viewed it through the filter of someone missing dialysis, or being forced to change hospitals for a chemo treatment, or wondering if that recurring pain in the kidney should be looked at, etc - I would easily see that many people's health outcomes were going to be worse, without ever contracting CV19 as long as the "non-essential" portions of health services were shut down.

It is time to quickly get hospitals and labs back in motion. There are healthcare workers being furloughed while sick folks wait for  hospitals to open back up for surgeries and other services. Arbitrarily picking winners and losers (essential services versus non-essential) is failing.  The strong can help the weak if allowed to.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 22, 2020, 12:20:27 PM
Here is evidence that California has been simmering longer than most if not all locations.  The article suggests it takes 4 weeks for someone to contract and die meaning this person may have had Covid-19 as early as mid-January. 

Mmmmmm?  And yet we did NOT see a spike in deaths in California.  What gives?

"A person who died at home in Santa Clara County on Feb. 6 was infected with the coronavirus at the time of death, a stunning discovery that makes that individual the first recorded COVID-19 fatality in the United States, according to autopsy results released by public health officials late Tuesday.

That death — three weeks before the first fatality was reported in the U.S., in Washington state on Feb. 28 — adds to increasing evidence that the virus was in the country far earlier than once thought."


https://www.sfchronicle.com/health/article/First-known-U-S-coronavirus-death-occurred-on-15217316.php?fbclid=IwAR39HsgEWfUYFUNaaYHjQRIuS6qSQPjLfQnMibl5qC3pVKspvLl8seQK2TQ

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 22, 2020, 12:25:43 PM
Given how highly contagious this is with one of the highest R factors ever when some random person gets the Corona virus in January, from someone who spread it, both then likely spread it one dies and it went on uncontained by any shetler in place:

Why Didn't California Blow Up like New York, or New Jersey or Michigan?

As Richard Feynman has said, “One of the ways of stopping science would be only to do experiments where you know the law.”  Physics is about probing into the unknown, and “what we need is imagination, but imagination in a terrible strait-jacket.  We have to find a new view of the world that has to agree with everything that is known but disagrees in its predictions somewhere, other wise it is not interesting.  And in that disagreement it must agree with nature.  If you can find any other view of the world which agrees over the entire range where things have already been observed, but disagrees somewhere else, you may have made a great discovery.  It is very nearly impossible, but not quite. . . . “     Conclusion- In Search of Schrodinger’s Cat
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Subber on April 22, 2020, 01:35:00 PM
USC and L.A. County Department of Public Health officials have released the preliminary results of their antibody tests, which show a surprising number of residents have been infected with the coronavirus:

"Based on the results of the first round of testing, the research team estimates that approximately 4.1% of the county’s adult population has an antibody to the virus. Adjusting this estimate for the statistical margin of error implies about 2.8% to 5.6% of the county’s adult population has an antibody to the virus — which translates to approximately 221,000 to 442,000 adults in the county who have been infected. That estimate is 28 to 55 times higher than the 7,994 confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported to the county at the time of the study in early April. The number of COVID-related deaths in the county has now surpassed 600."


600/221,000 = .27%
600/442,000 = 0.14%


https://news.usc.edu/168987/antibody-testing-results-covid-19-infections-los-angeles-county/ (https://news.usc.edu/168987/antibody-testing-results-covid-19-infections-los-angeles-county/)
Early antibody testing suggests COVID-19 infections in L.A. County greatly exceed documented cases
USC and L.A. County Department of Public Health officials have released the preliminary results of their antibody tests, which show a surprising number of residents have been infected with the coronavirus.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 23, 2020, 06:27:49 AM
PonoBill posted this elsewhere.  I found it very informative.  Along the lines of "Oh yeah I always knew that but wish I had said it."

Or more like deja vu.  When the vision goes to memory and comes right back to the front making you think you always knew it.

PonoBill was a bit more sour on Carl.  Because I grew up in Ithaca, NY and Carl was much older, he was a hometown hero.  The greatest hero I could imagine until Maui Meyer moved to town.

https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-kit-carl-sagan/?fbclid=IwAR0gtcXBwGb5w7VRlNpduywmQng_AMVOyBByIpcmHBqxrP7p4XAKeb7mPiA
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: PonoBill on April 23, 2020, 06:33:49 AM
Maui lives here in Hood River. Still quite the hero. I admired Carl Sagan, I'm just such an introvert that extroverts make me squirm a little.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: peterp on April 23, 2020, 11:26:53 AM
But the total death numbers offer a more complete portrait of the pandemic, experts say, especially because most countries report only those Covid-19 deaths that occur in hospitals.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_NN_p_20200421&instance_id=17817&nl=morning-briefing&regi_id=123124401&section=topNews&segment_id=25631&te=1&user_id=1de94dbd8c722eed2380270ee571b043

This article is showing the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the CDC is reporting.  In the United States as a whole the Death total is DOWN by 18K through ~ April 4th.  But the Numbers are changing fast.  Even if there is a spike in the coming weeks, which is likely, you have to measure this continuously to see what the effect is for the entire year. 

There is a backlog of Net Negative Deaths running @ -2,000 to - 4,000 per week.  These will get consumed in the near term but at the end of time these numbers portray the net effect of Covid Big or Small.

The NYT article specifically excludes countries/cities with zero or negative change in total deaths....hence they show NYC, but not the US as a whole. The data is named: "Where we found higher deaths than normal".
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 23, 2020, 06:53:28 PM
New Perspective: Covid-19 appears to bias towards the older population.  For example the following Countries have XX % over the age of 65.  ~ 85% of the deaths have attacked this age bracket (I am standing down from Comorbidity for the moment).

>> 65 years:

23%     Italy
21.5%  Germany
19.7%  France
15.4%  United States
 4.8%   Philippines

These numbers should LIMIT the potential victims from Covid-19.

I then split the Population into >> 65 and << 65 and assigned 85% of deaths to the >> 65 Crowd and 15% of Deaths to the << 65 Crowd.

This results in a separation of the Deaths per 100K residents.  This can be used to generate a Factor. 

100K Factor = Deaths / 100K Over 65
                      Deaths / 100K Under 65

Results look like this:
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: peterp on April 24, 2020, 12:34:23 AM
New Perspective: Covid-19 appears to bias towards the older population.  For example the following Countries have XX % over the age of 65.  ~ 85% of the deaths have attacked this age bracket (I am standing down from Comorbidity for the moment).

>> 65 years:

23%     Italy
21.5%  Germany
19.7%  France
15.4%  United States
 4.8%   Philippines

These numbers should LIMIT the potential victims from Covid-19.

I then split the Population into >> 65 and << 65 and assigned 85% of deaths to the >> 65 Crowd and 15% of Deaths to the << 65 Crowd.

This results in a separation of the Deaths per 100K residents.  This can be used to generate a Factor. 

100K Factor = Deaths / 100K Over 65
                      Deaths / 100K Under 65

Results look like this:

Africa = South Africa?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on April 24, 2020, 03:34:31 AM
There have been some majorly upending developments lately. 

Death rate in US doesn't seem to have peaked yet.  Over 50,000 deaths in 30 days.  We were at 700 deaths 30 days ago.
Infection rate is all across the board.
Date of initial arrival and spread is all equally uncertain. 

Some stuff from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

New York State Governor Cuomo said that preliminary findings from an antibody study conducted on 3,000 people at grocery stores across New York State found a 13.9% had coronavirus antibodies, suggesting a 13.9% actual infection rate statewide (21.2% in New York City), which translates to an estimate of about 2,700,000 actual cases in New York State (10 times more than the about 270,000 cases that have been detected and reported officially). Governor Cuomo acknowledged that the official count reported by New York State (which still is not including probable deaths as recommended by the new CDC guidelines) of about 15,500 deaths is "not accurate" as it doesn't account for stay at home deaths. Based on Worldometer's count (which includes probable deaths reported by New York City) of about 21,000 deaths and the 2,700,000 case estimate from the new antibody study, the actual case fatality rate in New York State could be at around 0.78%
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Area 10 on April 25, 2020, 05:56:06 AM
The (immediate) mortality rate is only one way of looking at the impact of CV19. A substantial number of patients will survive, but will have suffered life-limiting or quality-of-life limiting long-term damage. We have no idea what proportion of patients this applies to, or the variety of the long-term problems they will show. We won’t know this for many years, probably. But it’s worth bearing in mind that the categories of outcome are not just: (1) dead; (2) totally recovered.

Of course, the Trump supporters on this forum will now be rushing to use his suggested methods of “virus cleansing” via injection/application of caustic substances, and strong UV light inside the body. So that could add a few extra to the list of permanently disabled too.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Wetstuff on April 26, 2020, 08:09:26 AM
As of  25 Apr... There's an interesting dynamic playing out in the area I am in.  The bottom county in the state of Delaware has 234,000 residents and ~1400 confirmed cases .. the four counties in Maryland that 'border' this Delaware county have 219,000 residents and 263 confirmed cases.  The entire area is mostly rural/agricultural with a focus on poultry and grain for poultry.  The Atlantic coast is developed for tourism/second homes. 

I do not have numbers, but like the midwest states with rampant spread in other meat plants, this Delaware county has a large population of undocumented workers working in chicken plants.  This whole area is sprinkled with them - they are the best roofers, drywallers, provide all the agricultural labor, and cut half the lawns in the area.  This area typically has millions of chickens in production at any given time.  In the 1960s it was mainly vegetables, but poultry dominated as 'factory farms' began to increase size and production.

Then, there's this...

https://nypost.com/2020/04/16/2-million-chickens-will-be-slaughtered-over-coronavirus-staff-issues/


In the story. ..somehow the reason for "COVID-19-related staff shortages." is not discussed.  But, I would bet the reason is in the virus count in Sussex County Delaware. Who would want to think the 'fresh' chicken you just bought was packed with the virus. 

There is a law that says a business cannot employ undocumented labor with a federal reporting requirement.  My impression is the law was written for cover and intentionally not enforced, unless politically needed.  For the most part, these people are 'disposable' if unable to work for any reason.  As shown with the Twin Towers on 9/11 ...where the cleaning and food service staff were neither accounted for nor did their families share in compensation.  We somehow both want to stop illegals from coming ...perhaps it is because we feel 11 million or so is just enough to clean our houses and care for grandma, but we will neither deport them en masse nor force the companies that employ them to provide the benefits accorded to 'regular' Americans.

As regular Americans get a Virus-bonus check, and even perhaps, a $600 weekly bonus atop their standard unemployment check, these folks are left to sweat it out.   

Jim
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Chan on April 26, 2020, 09:00:12 AM
Covid clinics?  Assuming this is going to be around for a while, perhaps the government could consider implementing a program of nationwide networked clinics with limited oversight by existing medical staff (doctors, physicians assistants and nurses) and staffed instead primarily by newly, specifically trained, infectious care medical assistants who fall within the low risk covid category (no comorbidity). Education and certification could be provided to the millions of capable newly unemployed through a partnership between the CDC and private and public higher education institutions.  It would take at least a year to implement but this could be operational as soon as next spring.   With expanded care capacity, the US could take a softer voluntary approach to mitigation in the future.  The current risk to society from this virus is amplified by the inability of the existing healthcare system to absorb the needs of covid19 patient care creating the mandate to flatten the curve.  Doctors and nurses are overworked, increasing their vulnerability to infection themselves, putting an added burden on capacity for care.  ICU units can quickly exceed bed capacity with covid patients receiving primarily palliative care.  This could be managed by the new system on site, or when possible by providing families and nursing homes with support for at home care.

The current level of unemployment, not seen since the great depression, will likely be a persistent issue with staggering financial and emotional costs.  This program would be expensive, but it would provide immediate value and possibly a path to a return to normalcy.  Once in place, expanded training could allow for additional medical services to be provided though this adjunct testing and care system. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Tom on April 26, 2020, 01:08:04 PM
Wetstuff, Hence one of the reasons behind sanctuary cities and states. The fact is that there are a large number of people in the United States, particularly California, that do not have a pieces of paper to allows them to live and work here. Right or wrong, that is a fact.

In the current situation, if anyone of them has CV19, they need to be tested, cared for and quarantined. If they are afraid to seek medical help because they fear being arrested or deported, they will infect more and more people. Also, California recognizes they are are major contributor to the economy and has made efforts help them.

from CNN
Quote
Undocumented immigrants aren't getting stimulus checks from the federal government, but in California they'll be eligible for cash payments from a $125 million coronavirus disaster relief fund.
"We feel a deep sense of gratitude for people that are in fear of deportation but are still addressing the essential needs of tens of millions of Californians," Gov. Gavin Newsom said as he announced the new fund on Wednesday. "And that's why I'm proud as governor to be the very first state to announce a program for direct disaster assistance to those individuals."
The one-time benefit will provide $500 of support per adult, with a cap of $1,000 per household, Newsom's office said. The fund combines $75 million in state donations with $50 million from private philanthropists.
Some 150,000 undocumented immigrants will benefit
In announcing the move, Newsom stressed that undocumented workers are essential and over represented in many sectors keeping the state afloat, including health care, agriculture and food, manufacturing and logistics and construction.
Newsom said that 10% of California's workforce is undocumented. And though they paid over $2.5 billion in local and state taxes last year, they benefit from neither unemployment insurance nor the $2.2 trillion stimulus signed by President Trump.

Chan, great idea. Only problem is that we would need an intelligent leader at the national level to implement and oversee it.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: TallDude on April 26, 2020, 01:47:35 PM


Chan, great idea. Only problem is that we would need an intelligent leader at the national level to implement and oversee it.
We have a great "I mean really totally great" leader (in his own dimension) and another in the running who looks to be living in his own demencia. Cross your fingers for a great VP. 
The injection comment was just out there, as many of his are. Unfortunately, a really intelligent leader is not on the menu.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Chan on April 26, 2020, 03:11:16 PM
I agree. I would like to see oversight moved out of the hands of the politicians as soon as possible.  This is quickly spiraling into an out of control pork party with unknown long-term outcomes.  With US health care costs at around 20% of GDP, the highest of any nation, we should have resources to tackle this issue.  The current expanded unemployment program will need to be phased out at some point and many jobs and sectors are not likely to bounce back in the near term.  It seems like this could be a time when some of the systemic issues responsible for our disproportionate medical spending could be addressed and with targeted education new jobs could be created in the process. 
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 30, 2020, 06:27:52 AM
But the total death numbers offer a more complete portrait of the pandemic, experts say, especially because most countries report only those Covid-19 deaths that occur in hospitals.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_NN_p_20200421&instance_id=17817&nl=morning-briefing&regi_id=123124401&section=topNews&segment_id=25631&te=1&user_id=1de94dbd8c722eed2380270ee571b043

This article is showing the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the CDC is reporting.  In the United States as a whole the Death total is DOWN by 18K through ~ April 4th.  But the Numbers are changing fast.  Even if there is a spike in the coming weeks, which is likely, you have to measure this continuously to see what the effect is for the entire year. 

There is a backlog of Net Negative Deaths running @ -2,000 to - 4,000 per week.  These will get consumed in the near term but at the end of time these numbers portray the net effect of Covid Big or Small.

One week later.  Net Deaths now POSITIVE.  By ~ 4,000 people. 

As in COVID is adding to MORE than expected deaths since the beginning of February.  The graph needs to be reviewed towards the end of the year to confirm whether COVID buldged the total for the US or just pushed Comorbidities along.

I am seeing a bunch of articles about EXCESS deaths.  They are usually cherry picking locations like NY City or Spain.  But NOT showing the whole picture.  It's not like Shelter in Place can work forever to keep people alive but worth considering the side effects.

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on April 30, 2020, 06:32:07 AM
What is the Covid-19 Death rate? 

Here is the Cross Matrix. I applied to NY State since it is the furthest Along. Population 19.5MM.

Over 65 is 15% of population but 90% of the deaths.

They have been saying that 20% have been infected but let's bump that to 30%.

This shows a split fatality rate of

Assume HERD at 50% or 60% and you can ONLY double the number of Expected Deaths from Today. No more.

This would put NY State's Max Death @ ~ 36,000 (Maybe 40K)

Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Admin on May 09, 2020, 03:36:59 AM
This chart shows the world distribution of deaths from Covid-19. 

(https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/styles/is_large/public/images/novel-coronavirus-cases-worldwide-deaths-09-may-2020.png?itok=qUlTzj8y)
https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/geographical-distribution-2019-ncov-cases
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: deepmud on May 09, 2020, 07:22:59 AM
The (immediate) mortality rate is only one way of looking at the impact of CV19. A substantial number of patients will survive, but will have suffered life-limiting or quality-of-life limiting long-term damage. We have no idea what proportion of patients this applies to, or the variety of the long-term problems they will show. We won’t know this for many years, probably. But it’s worth bearing in mind that the categories of outcome are not just: (1) dead; (2) totally recovered.

THIS. This worries me. We are so focused charts, and comorbidity, and trying to feel in control. Beasho's deaths Covid vs deaths we avoided by lockdown for Covid - that seems like trying to feel in control to me. There isn't much control and this is not a known virus with known outcomes. Plenty of healthy people are coming out of Covid with lung damage - yet as my state starts opening I see people out and grouping like "oh, good, this is over". It's not over. I agree there has to be some way to make a living - people have to eat - but I also see really dumb behavior. Yesterday my groceries were brought out by a young man with a mask basically on his chin. I see a lot of workers (and some public, shoppers, etc)  with masks on but noses over the top - LOTS of that - on their chin? Is this some "you can't make me!!" stuff? Defy the masks, Defy the virus? I worry my wife will be killed by this (or even myself - I'll be one of those "well, he was obese so it's not like he was going to live anyway" stats)  before we get a vaccine - and the guy delivering my food, that I am employing (via purchases) to avoid exposure, is trying to make a statement. Pisses me off and yet I know I can't fix a mass societal denial of science. People I thought were normal are posting videos about the entire Covid "hoax".  Here's my link - we live in "The Dumbest Timeline" - it's funny - and sad.  Just needs murder hornets for an update.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nfbeK5LAl0
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on May 27, 2020, 01:44:09 PM
Deaths in the United States below 1,000 per day for the last 3 days running.  This is good news.

At one point I suggested that the susceptability to Covid-19 was a function of 1) Comorbidity 2) Age (maybe) and 3) Bad Luck Genes

This woman calculates item #3 to be equal to just 20%.  Doing calculations on the isolated US Roosevelt and the Diamond Princess cruise ship she suggests that the High R value of 2.4 could / can coexist with a NET R value of just 0.48 if 80% of the population is NOT susceptible or does NOT catch Covid-19 in the first place. 

Interesting theory.  If true the NET R = 0.48 means that Covid-19 will go extinct on its own.  That the people who were susceptible caught it and caught it quickly and now it has flashed through the dry underbrush like a quick burning forest fire. 

Good New - YES!  Wishful Thinking - YES!  But at least she supports the hypothesis with numbers.

https://youtu.be/sTFOsQfDFi8

2nd Picture shows declining worldwide deaths.  This is beyond a flattened curve it is declining.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: all~wet on May 27, 2020, 05:04:43 PM
That is good news. Thanks for posting.

I wonder if the above is true- plus herd immunity will make the estimated 18 mo wait for vaccine somewhat of a moot point? Or at least the prospect of a second wave in the fall not critically severe. One can only hope.
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Chan on May 27, 2020, 05:30:59 PM
80% are resistant but there is no evidence to support that 80% are resistant?
Title: Re: COVID-19 Data Model Updated Daily
Post by: Beasho on May 27, 2020, 07:58:37 PM
80% are resistant but there is no evidence to support that 80% are resistant?

The evidence comes from the USS Roosevelt and the Cruise ship.  The theory is that there was no hiding from the virus.  The ships were perfect petri dishes and therefore everyone was assumed to be exposed. 

We have since heard about old people that have "just caught the disease sitting at home."  Makes almost no sense unless this thing does have a VERY high R factor (transmissability) but only to those susceptible.  Similar observation on Washington state where they had it long before people were distancing or wearing masks yet the virus didn't go bonkers.

Another example was the person who died on February 6th diagnosed with Corona virus (much later) in Santa Clara, California.  This person was the first to die by 3 weeks from the assumed first in Washington state.  Again the virus did not go crazy and California only went into Shelter in Place on March 17th.