Novel Carona virus

166,451 Views | 3804 Replies | Last: 5 hrs ago by OregonDonor
onaduck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Just to add, one thing that's throwing me off is the positive test percentages. I've seen varying stats, but it looks like something approaching 90% of the people who can actually get through the screening process for a test are turning up negative. So then one has to ask: Is it really way more widespread than we think? Are we really looking at millions of cases? Are there really that many people who are infected but just living a normal life? Even if 80% of people were coming back negative, that's testing the people who are more likely to have it. And though every virus is different, it seems highly improbable to me that the number of infected without pretty obvious symptoms can't be a really high number. It's hard to make it make sense. But I'm sure we'll look back and see and learn some pretty baffling things from this.

There was also a controversial scientific study done in the UK suggesting the virus was roaming much earlier than thought and that the UK might already be reaching herd immunity and the virus will slow there. We'll see.
onaduck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OregonDonor said:

Who owns the Wall Street Journal?
Oh, I know. But to be fair, what to do about the economy is a real conversation that needs to take place. And we all know one thing for sure, Trump and business want people spending money as soon as they can possibly make a case for it that doesn't result in a red state backlash.

"Easter. Such a nice day. A very important day. Would be a great day fill the churches and start new."

I mean, can you be a little less overtly manipulative of symbolism.
TRILL WALTON
How long do you want to ignore this user?
onaduck said:

Just to add, one thing that's throwing me off is the positive test percentages. I've seen varying stats, but it looks like something approaching 90% of the people who can actually get through the screening process for a test are turning up negative. So then one has to ask: Is it really way more widespread than we think? Are we really looking at millions of cases? Are there really that many people who are infected but just living a normal life? Even if 80% of people were coming back negative, that's testing the people who are more likely to have it. And though every virus is different, it seems highly improbable to me that the number of infected without pretty obvious symptoms can't be a really high number. It's hard to make it make sense. But I'm sure we'll look back and see and learn some pretty baffling things from this.

There was also a controversial scientific study done in the UK suggesting the virus was roaming much earlier than thought and that the UK might already be reaching herd immunity and the virus will slow there. We'll see.
False negatives (and false positives) are a thing.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/19/coronavirus-false-test-results-with-the-push-to-screen-come-questions-of-accuracy/

Not saying that's the sole answer to everything, obviously, but a possible explanation among others. Can't underestimate just how badly this administration screwed up by not getting testing right.

I also read about that UK thing and my lizard brain got moving . . . not willing to go there yet, but I admit it isn't completely and totally out of the realm of possibility.
onaduck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TRILL WALTON said:

onaduck said:

Just to add, one thing that's throwing me off is the positive test percentages. I've seen varying stats, but it looks like something approaching 90% of the people who can actually get through the screening process for a test are turning up negative. So then one has to ask: Is it really way more widespread than we think? Are we really looking at millions of cases? Are there really that many people who are infected but just living a normal life? Even if 80% of people were coming back negative, that's testing the people who are more likely to have it. And though every virus is different, it seems highly improbable to me that the number of infected without pretty obvious symptoms can't be a really high number. It's hard to make it make sense. But I'm sure we'll look back and see and learn some pretty baffling things from this.

There was also a controversial scientific study done in the UK suggesting the virus was roaming much earlier than thought and that the UK might already be reaching herd immunity and the virus will slow there. We'll see.
False negatives (and false positives) are a thing.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/19/coronavirus-false-test-results-with-the-push-to-screen-come-questions-of-accuracy/

Not saying that's the sole answer to everything, obviously, but a possible explanation among others. Can't underestimate just how badly this administration screwed up by not getting testing right.

I also read about that UK thing and my lizard brain got moving . . . not willing to go there yet, but I admit it isn't completely and totally out of the realm of possibility.
Well, I'm hoping the stuff is way more widespread an everybody is infected and the next couple of months will be the worst of it. Let's hope. It's interesting geeking out on this stuff as it unfolds and looking at all the different takes. I think the easiest, most simple way to view things is are our hospitals overrun or not. And go from there.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3076323/third-coronavirus-cases-may-be-silent-carriers-classified
Deanmikos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GorgeDuck said:

PeoriaDuck11 said:

https://t.co/4U4B27acN8

A little morning reading for the we-are-all-gonna-die crowd.


But, there is one premise/fact that they state in their article that seems to be way off base, and they provide no reference as to where they get the number. They state that the average death rate for the common flu is about .1%, but that is no where close to every reference I have seen. According to the CDC, the average yearly mortality rate from the flu in the US is about .0001-.0002%. In one of the more recent deadlier flu years in '17-'18, there were an estimated 61,000 deaths, but that was out of an estimated 45 million infections, which puts the mortality rate at .00014%. In another bad year ('14-'15) there were an estimated 51,000 deaths, but this time out of only an estimated 30 million cases, which raises the mortality rate to a staggering .00017%.

I've agreed with pretty much everything you've said recently Gorge but I think that 61,000 out of 45,000,000 is 0.1355%. and 51,000 out of 30,000,000 is 0.16999%. I still think your point is valid but I wanted to make sure the math was solid.
Tru
How long do you want to ignore this user?
onaduck said:

OregonDonor said:

Who owns the Wall Street Journal?
Oh, I know. But to be fair, what to do about the economy is a real conversation that needs to take place. And we all know one thing for sure, Trump and business want people spending money as soon as they can possibly make a case for it that doesn't result in a red state backlash.

"Easter. Such a nice day. A very important day. Would be a great day fill the churches and start new."

I mean, can you be a little less overtly manipulative of symbolism.
Maybe he's an optimist? That's rhetorical. I heard last night about the Easter comments. I don't think we'll be there in 2.5 weeks.

Side note, for those interested in mass (sorry, religion, but worthwhile at this time IMHO), check to see if they are available via a Facebook feed. This worked for my family last weekend.

Be safe everyone. Let's stop the spread and then we can start rebuilding.
GorgeDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ADeanmikos said:

GorgeDuck said:

PeoriaDuck11 said:

https://t.co/4U4B27acN8

A little morning reading for the we-are-all-gonna-die crowd.


But, there is one premise/fact that they state in their article that seems to be way off base, and they provide no reference as to where they get the number. They state that the average death rate for the common flu is about .1%, but that is no where close to every reference I have seen. According to the CDC, the average yearly mortality rate from the flu in the US is about .0001-.0002%. In one of the more recent deadlier flu years in '17-'18, there were an estimated 61,000 deaths, but that was out of an estimated 45 million infections, which puts the mortality rate at .00014%. In another bad year ('14-'15) there were an estimated 51,000 deaths, but this time out of only an estimated 30 million cases, which raises the mortality rate to a staggering .00017%.

I've agreed with pretty much everything you've said recently Gorge but I think that 61,000 out of 45,000,000 is 0.1355%. and 51,000 out of 30,000,000 is 0.16999%. I still think your point is valid but I wanted to make sure the math was solid.
Yeah, that was a fail at math for me....thanks for the corrections. It was still somewhat early and I was trying to do too many things at once and just moved my decimal points in the wrong direction. So yeah, kind of damages my point since the WSJ paper was right about the .1% average flu mortality.

I still think when all is said and done, the mortality rate of Covid19 might end up being higher but not all that much greater than the flu, but it's rapid onset is still having a detrimental effect on the healthcare system as it gets overwhelmed by those needing ICU beds and hospitalization all at once.

Thanks again for the correction.
GorgeDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
onaduck said:

Just to add, one thing that's throwing me off is the positive test percentages. I've seen varying stats, but it looks like something approaching 90% of the people who can actually get through the screening process for a test are turning up negative. So then one has to ask: Is it really way more widespread than we think? Are we really looking at millions of cases? Are there really that many people who are infected but just living a normal life? Even if 80% of people were coming back negative, that's testing the people who are more likely to have it. And though every virus is different, it seems highly improbable to me that the number of infected without pretty obvious symptoms can't be a really high number. It's hard to make it make sense. But I'm sure we'll look back and see and learn some pretty baffling things from this.

There was also a controversial scientific study done in the UK suggesting the virus was roaming much earlier than thought and that the UK might already be reaching herd immunity and the virus will slow there. We'll see.
Yeah, very valid points. I still think there is so much that is unknown that we won't really have a grasp on what it all means until all the data has been collected. I have seen suggestions in a few places that scientists are attempting to develop an antibody test that would allow us to test in vastly higher numbers over the next couple years to determine how many people were infected but asymptomatic. That would really be the only way that would give researchers a better idea of the accurate numbers of total infections.
twindux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LikeLamike said:

PeoriaDuck11 said:

https://t.co/4U4B27acN8

A little morning reading for the we-are-all-gonna-die crowd.


I'll preface this by saying I did not read the article you posted because I don't have a sub to the WSJ. I only saw that it was an opinion article and written by someone I assume isn't a medical professional.

That being said, I don't think anyone in this thread thinks 'we-are-all-gonna-die', but rather we would like to avoid a systematic collapse of our health care systems because we overload our hospitals with COVID-19 cases that can easily be stopped by quarantining ourselves and shutting things down for awhile.

Even if COVID-19 has a 0.50% mortality rate, it could still lead to hundreds of thousands of deaths if we aren't careful and do what we can to stop this from spreading. I still don't see how anyone can look at the situation in Italy, where they had to use Triage to determine who lives & who dies, but still try to downplay the seriousness of this.


Don't know if they're right or wrong, but the authors are Med School professors at Stanford.

TRILL WALTON
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Who cares if they're med school professors from Stanford? They're one of thousands of voices. I get that it's hard to cut through all the noise, but I think there are three unassailable truths here: 1) There are people carrying the virus; 2) There are people who are not yet immune to it (which, at this point, is the vast majority of people, a fact these med school professors conveniently ignore); and 3) Without social distancing, there are innumerable connections between these two populations through which the virus can travel.

Shelter in place. That's it. There is no widespread human immunity to this virus, and there's currently no cure. The pandemic will begin to surge back in subsequent waves any time suppression is relaxed, until widespread vaccination is possible, which will not happen for at least 12 months. I'm sympathetic to the notion that a suppression strategy isn't necessarily sustainable for as long as we'd need to sustain it. I understand the economic implications. On top of that, it's unclear the extent to which people will voluntarily socially distance for months at a time. Most won't stand for it. I think we'll eventually see a system in place similar to rationing, where certain populations/groups are able to have more flexibility, and the economy operates in waves.

In other words, it's time to start thinking about this pandemic as an event that will force permanent transformations to social life. Lots of people are wondering when we're going to just get back to normal, but I personally don't think we're ever getting back to "normal." When this pandemic is over, our normal is going to be very different than it was before.
OregonDonor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's a fair question to ask. The problem I have with people pointing to the low mortality rate is they aren't necessarily mentioning why that death rate is so low. Even in the countries that took draconian measures like China and Italy, their death rates were much higher than ours so far. Can you imagine what they'd have been if they had done nothing? Italy death rate is right around 10% so far.

At some point opening things back up is going to need to happen. Maybe we just open it up to young, healthy people, and people that have had the virus and recovered. QB11 brought up isolating the sick and elderly last week and instead of everyone. Might have been the smart move.
N8theGrate
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PeoriaDuck11 said:

https://t.co/4U4B27acN8

A little morning reading for the we-are-all-gonna-die crowd.


That's an opinion. Not hard news.

The WSJ is a great publication. They do some very good investigative journalism. However they have two very separate sides when it comes to their reporting.

The actual news side which is essentially well research hard news with fact checking and great editors and investigative journalism that runs center-right. They do a very good job. And the other side is their opinion side, which is essentially and arm Fox News and runs very wide right. Their opinion side is completely worthless when it comes to a news source, just one person's opinion with an agenda without fact checking editors like the news side.

Posting opinion pieces and presenting it as hard news is the equivalent of fake news.
TRILL WALTON
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OregonDonor said:

It's a fair question to ask. The problem I have with people pointing to the low mortality rate is they aren't necessarily mentioning why that death rate is so low. Even in the countries that took draconian measures like China and Italy, their death rates were much higher than ours so far. Can you imagine what they'd have been if they had done nothing? Italy death rate is right around 10% so far.

At some point opening things back up is going to need to happen. Maybe we just open it up to young, healthy people, and people that have had the virus and recovered. QB11 brought up isolating the sick and elderly last week and instead of everyone. Might have been the smart move.
Not to be a jerk, but QB11 is an anonymous dude on a college football message board. He is not an epidemiologist. Let's dial back our worship of him just a little bit.

The truth is, nobody is invulnerable to this disease. The rates of severe and deadly cases is higher among older generations, sure, but the data already shows that age alone does not make you invincible. The CDC covers a huge 20-44 age range in its data, but of that group: 14.3 percent hospitalized, 2 percent in the ICU, and 0.1 percent fatality rate. For people 45 to 54, the CDC reports 21.2 percent have been hospitalized, 5.4 percent were put in the ICU, and 0.5 percent have died.

And by the way, those numbers are increasing. I used this link as my source, but these numbers are already higher because the death rate and reported cases in this country are climbing and will continue climb. Letting the "less at risk" go un-isolated would still overwhelm our healthcare system, and it would still put those "more at risk" people in danger because they need the healthcare system to help them with the things that put them at risk.

Shelter. In. Place.
twindux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TRILL WALTON said:

Who cares if they're med school professors from Stanford? They're one of thousands of voices. I get that it's hard to cut through all the noise, but I think there are three unassailable truths here: 1) There are people carrying the virus; 2) There are people who are not yet immune to it (which, at this point, is the vast majority of people, a fact these med school professors conveniently ignore); and 3) Without social distancing, there are innumerable connections between these two populations through which the virus can travel.

Shelter in place. That's it. There is no widespread human immunity to this virus, and there's currently no cure. The pandemic will begin to surge back in subsequent waves any time suppression is relaxed, until widespread vaccination is possible, which will not happen for at least 12 months. I'm sympathetic to the notion that a suppression strategy isn't necessarily sustainable for as long as we'd need to sustain it. I understand the economic implications. On top of that, it's unclear the extent to which people will voluntarily socially distance for months at a time. Most won't stand for it. I think we'll eventually see a system in place similar to rationing, where certain populations/groups are able to have more flexibility, and the economy operates in waves.

In other words, it's time to start thinking about this pandemic as an event that will force permanent transformations to social life. Lots of people are wondering when we're going to just get back to normal, but I personally don't think we're ever getting back to "normal." When this pandemic is over, our normal is going to be very different than it was before.
I was replying to someone asserting the writers of the article had no medical background.

Like I said, I don't know if they're right or wrong...but they know a hell of a lot more than I do...or you, probably. Theirs is an educated opinion. Is it the right one? i have no idea.
twindux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OregonDonor said:

It's a fair question to ask. The problem I have with people pointing to the low mortality rate is they aren't necessarily mentioning why that death rate is so low. Even in the countries that took draconian measures like China and Italy, their death rates were much higher than ours so far. Can you imagine what they'd have been if they had done nothing? Italy death rate is right around 10% so far.

At some point opening things back up is going to need to happen. Maybe we just open it up to young, healthy people, and people that have had the virus and recovered. QB11 brought up isolating the sick and elderly last week and instead of everyone. Might have been the smart move.
I agree....there is a lot unknown. I was just pointing out that the writers are not your garden variety editorial writers or politicians.
Tru
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I made this for the Stimulus Package thread that got locked in the Sports forum. Those boogers can't keep an even keel so I'm just going to share it here. Thanks to DuckPlanner for the tweet material. It kinda summarizes my feelings about the current situation.




OregonDonor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oh calm down player. You're not keeping it trill.
Lol

I've gotten into it with QB on countless issues over the years. Definitely no worshipping going on here.

I'm just trying to keep an open mind. There have been medical/scientific experts suggest that isolating the most vulnerable, along with testing EVERYBODY, would be the most efficient way to battle this.

End President was actually asked about this during the press conference 30 minutes ago and he scoffed at the idea of testing everyone.
We're now up over 64,000 cases in the U. S. We'll likely pass Italy tomorrow. Almost half those cases are in New York. It's really bad there.
onaduck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/mathematics-life-and-death-how-disease-models-shape-national-shutdowns-and-other
TRILL WALTON
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Triller than u are lol

No in all seriousness, the concept of testing everyone and then separating the vulnerable is a great idea and might have been possible at one point. But I don't think we live in a reality where that ever becomes a possibility. It's also an easy thing to do in small Italian villages, or Asian countries with much smaller populations compared to ours. South Korea has 51 million people; California has 40 million just by itself.
onaduck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
13,300 new cases today in the US. I think it pretty likely we will be number 1 on that worldmeters list and pass China and Italy in 24 hours. If the daily deaths make a big jump into the 300-400 range in the next 2-3 days, we're going to be heading in a bad way. Germany seems to be keeping their death rate down. We're not doing bad so long as we only get incremental gains over the next week or so.

The State of MN just announced it has 253 available ICU beds in the state. Even at a 10% hospitalization rate, that doesn't leave a lot of room. I just don't see any way these shelter in place rules aren't going to last a couple months.
OregonDonor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves is "praying for wisdom" and has decided to bar any kind of stay at home orders in his state. The new rule supersedes any stay at home orders the mayor's of the state issued. Many mayors are now scrambling to figure out how to prevent the virus from spreading.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/mississippi-governor-untroubled-by-covid-crises-in-neighboring-states-81170501582
onaduck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
lol. Just watching today's press conference. The president is already back-pedaling on his Easter timeline from yesterday. He has absolutely zero discipline. Tomorrow it will be something different.

Doesn't really matter what he thinks about when the closures end because that's up to the governors and mayors anyways. The president hasn't shut a single thing down. The States do.

Also, see that the Dems went with McConnell and passed the bill and then McConnell immediately adjourned the Senate until the end of April so the House would be forced to pass the bill. Apparently it's the rip-off you would expect. I'll have to see the details, but the Dems went along with it, so they're on the hook for it too.
Jakespeare
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hell is Coming
Quote:

Except a few educated people, no one has any idea that there are already around 2 million infected people in America today and the American death toll will exceed 15,000 in just 24 days. If we don't take strict measures, we will be reporting 1000 deaths per day in just 3 weeks.

The attacks on 9/11 killed around 3000 people. We will be reporting a 9/11 every three days. That's why we say "hell is coming".

This is a mathematical certainty. It is inevitable.

I have never felt susceptible to fear mongering or getting carried away. But I still feel like we have no idea what we are in for. I've read a couple reports just like this, and the pure numbers of infection rates and mortality rates all point to this.
Guys we are not even at the beginning of this. This country is going on lockdown period. These -"assertions are all my opinions and frankly I'm super anxious so please don't take me as an expert. I just have to post something somewhere so I brought it to the OT board.
The economists have seen the data. They've ran the logistics. Even with high margins of error and conservative estimating this thing is going to devastate the world economy for a long time. Because it's about to wipe out tens of thousands. That's why there's no certainty in the stock market right now. Yeah shutdowns hurt, but the money people already see the prolonged slowing down as being more than a momentary blip.

The models and numbers are all in the link for your perusal. But if you think that we've weathered the worst and things are going to be up and running soon you better think again. Even Trump can't stand by his Easter statement because the numbers are undeniable. This thing is a freight train at full speed going downhill with no brakes. It will tell us when it's done moving.

This country will go on full lockdown in the next month. Nothing would make me happier than to be wrong and be the boy who cried wolf. But if someone out there rethinks their ideas of how serious this is and starts preparing better I'll feel like I did a small part.
OregonDonor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We're almost to 70,000 cases here in the U. S.

Today we'll pass Italy, and by the weekend we'll have passed China.

Yet, we're handling this beautifully. No one is doing a better job than us. Smh
predatorduck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OregonDonor said:

Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves is "praying for wisdom" and has decided to bar any kind of stay at home orders in his state. The new rule supersedes any stay at home orders the mayor's of the state issued. Many mayors are now scrambling to figure out how to prevent the virus from spreading.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/mississippi-governor-untroubled-by-covid-crises-in-neighboring-states-81170501582


Pray the virus away!
GorgeDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
3.28 million jobless claims from last week. At the peak of the '08-'09 recession, the weekly jobless claims was 665,000. The economy should, and likely will, bounce back much faster this time around once the virus is behind us, but 3.28M claims in a week is just insane...lots and lots of people out there are hurting in the short term. I may be joining them soon as I am a contract based worker, and my current contract will be completed in about 2 weeks, and as of right now, there aren't any new contracts coming in.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/26/weekly-jobless-claims.html
OregonDonor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dyesubduck said:

OregonDonor said:

Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves is "praying for wisdom" and has decided to bar any kind of stay at home orders in his state. The new rule supersedes any stay at home orders the mayor's of the state issued. Many mayors are now scrambling to figure out how to prevent the virus from spreading.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/mississippi-governor-untroubled-by-covid-crises-in-neighboring-states-81170501582


Pray the virus away!
It's unreal!

I have no problem with people praying, but to rely on that alone is idiotic. Any pastor, minister, preacher, rabbi, etc will tell you have to work to make things happen.

There was a parable about a catholic Jesuit that had an immaculate garden, with flowers and fruit everywhere, not a weed in sight. A passer by was admiring the garden and said "my you must have prayed a lot to get a garden as beautiful as yours". The Jesuit replied something to the effect that "yes I pray, but in order to have a prosperous garden you need to pick up the hoe! "
OregonDonor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OregonDonor said:

We're almost to 70,000 cases here in the U. S.

Today we'll pass Italy, and by the weekend we'll have passed China.

Yet, we're handling this beautifully. No one is doing a better job than us. Smh


And we've now hit 74,000 cases and passed Italy. We'll likely pass China by the end of the day. We had a solid month to prepare for this. Closing the border with China was a very smart move, but since then we've really failed.

We had a head start and completely blew it. Basically the Alamo bowl 2.0 (too soon?).
predatorduck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OregonDonor said:

OregonDonor said:

We're almost to 70,000 cases here in the U. S.

Today we'll pass Italy, and by the weekend we'll have passed China.

Yet, we're handling this beautifully. No one is doing a better job than us. Smh


And we've now hit 74,000 cases and passed Italy. We'll likely pass China by the end of the day. We had a solid month to prepare for this. Closing the border with China was a very smart move, but since then we've really failed.

We had a head start and completely blew it. Basically the Alamo bowl 2.0 (too soon?).


Do you think a country wide shut down like Italy is imminent? I know it's probably the right thing to do but I have a hard time seeing it happen in the US. Just because we're Americans and what not.

Also, the US death toll is way lower than Italy and China, why is that?
Jakespeare
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It will become economically necessary. I posted a link a few threads up. Give it a browse. But the medical toll will be so devestating a shutdown will be the only thing that stops the tide
OregonDonor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dyesubduck said:

OregonDonor said:

OregonDonor said:

We're almost to 70,000 cases here in the U. S.

Today we'll pass Italy, and by the weekend we'll have passed China.

Yet, we're handling this beautifully. No one is doing a better job than us. Smh


And we've now hit 74,000 cases and passed Italy. We'll likely pass China by the end of the day. We had a solid month to prepare for this. Closing the border with China was a very smart move, but since then we've really failed.

We had a head start and completely blew it. Basically the Alamo bowl 2.0 (too soon?).


Do you think a country wide shut down like Italy is imminent? I know it's probably the right thing to do but I have a hard time seeing it happen in the US. Just because we're Americans and what not.

Also, the US death toll is way lower than Italy and China, why is that?

I doubt we end up doing a country wide shut down. Even if every professional was suggesting it, the president is very proud of the economy. That's why he was so dismissive of the virus at first. He didn't want the stock market to plummet. He views a solid stock market as the key to getting re-elected. That's why he's backing off shut downs now.


As far as the discrepancies of death tolls from country to country, there must be several key factors.

1. General respiratory health of the population(America has the fewest smokers of almost any nation).

2. Average age. Does Italy and China have more elderly people?

3. Health care capacity. How many people can a country treat at a given time? How many beds, masks, ventilators, nurses doctors do they have?

4. How did the government handle the pandemic? Italy was late shutting things down. Now they've become overwhelmed.

The U. S. similarly was late addressing the virus. 20 days ago Italians warned America that we were making the same mistake they made, not treating this seriously.

GorgeDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dyesubduck said:

OregonDonor said:

OregonDonor said:

We're almost to 70,000 cases here in the U. S.

Today we'll pass Italy, and by the weekend we'll have passed China.

Yet, we're handling this beautifully. No one is doing a better job than us. Smh


And we've now hit 74,000 cases and passed Italy. We'll likely pass China by the end of the day. We had a solid month to prepare for this. Closing the border with China was a very smart move, but since then we've really failed.

We had a head start and completely blew it. Basically the Alamo bowl 2.0 (too soon?).


Do you think a country wide shut down like Italy is imminent? I know it's probably the right thing to do but I have a hard time seeing it happen in the US. Just because we're Americans and what not.

Also, the US death toll is way lower than Italy and China, why is that?
As for the death toll, I think there are a few different factors involved. Generally speaking, we have a younger population than Italy, but also tend to have higher comorbidity. Perhaps the primary factor is that we are simply behind Italy by about 7-9 days since virus community spread really began. I don't think our death totals will be greater than theirs within another week, but it will be a lot closer to where they were at now since days per onset. Also, just based on the numbers on worldometers.info, we have a significantly less number of confirmed recovered cases than Italy, so it will be interesting to see what happens to this numbers within another week (assuming that the numbers being reported and calculated by that site is truly accurate).

Italy numbers:
- Crossed 100 confirmed cases on 2/23
- Crossed 100 confirmed deaths on 3/4
- Crossed 10000 confirmed cases on 3/10 (16 days post 100 cases)
- Crossed 1000 confirmed deaths on 3/12 (8 days post 100 deaths)
- Went from 100 confirmed cases to 75k cases in 31 days
- Currently, out of approximately 80k confirmed cases they have approximately 10k confirmed recovered, so about 1 out of every 8 thus far.

U.S.A. numbers:
- Crossed 100 confirmed cases on 3/2 (9 days after Italy)
- Crossed 100 confirmed deaths on 3/17 (13 days after Italy)
- Crossed 10000 confirmed cases on 3/19 (9 days after Italy) (17 days post 100 cases)
- Crossed 1000 confirmed deaths on 3/25 (13 days after Italy) (8 days post 100 deaths)
- Went from 100 confirmed cases to 75k cases in 24 days
- Currently, out of approximately 75k confirmed cases we have approximately 2k confirmed recovered, so about 1 out of every 38 thus far.

Edit: Just to add, the US saw it's first day of 250 (247 to be exact) deaths yesterday. Not surprisingly, Italy saw its first day of 250 deaths on 3/13....12 days before the US, which is right in line with all the other numbers.

Those numbers are eerily similar, other than the confirmed recovered which makes since because Italy is about 9-13 days ahead of us, and the estimated course of the virus from infection to either recovery or death is about 18-24 days.

I think we will have a much better sense of what we can expect our death rate to be in another 9-13 days or so, when we get to where Italy is now in the timeline since initial onset of community spread. Again, I don't expect, or at least hope not, that our death totals will increase by another 7k in that period, but I wouldn't be surprised to see us somewhere around 5-6k total deaths, which would make us fairly similar in overall death rate to what Italy is seeing. And, if you believe a lot of what epidemiologists and other medical experts are saying, they do expect our daily death rates could be hitting 1000+/day in another week or two at the peak surge since many of the shelter in place and quarantine measures went into effect (in that 18-24 day infection to outcome timeline), so perhaps we will actually surpass Italy's numbers by then. If the US follows the same projection that Italy was on, which we have been so far, we will start to see days of 300-400 deaths over the next 3-4 days, quickly followed by a string of days of 600-800 deaths per day. Only time will tell.
OregonDonor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wow! We're almost up to 80,000 cases now. Italy is still jumping up with cases too, almost 7,000 a day. Germany and Spain are having over 6,000 new cases a day also.

We have nearly 11,000 new cases in the past 24 hours.

France has nearly 4,000 and the U. K. has close to 2,200, in the last day.

This thing isn't slowing down at all. China is the lone exception, with only 67 new cases, though their reported numbers could be false.
GorgeDuck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GorgeDuck said:

dyesubduck said:

OregonDonor said:

OregonDonor said:

We're almost to 70,000 cases here in the U. S.

Today we'll pass Italy, and by the weekend we'll have passed China.

Yet, we're handling this beautifully. No one is doing a better job than us. Smh


And we've now hit 74,000 cases and passed Italy. We'll likely pass China by the end of the day. We had a solid month to prepare for this. Closing the border with China was a very smart move, but since then we've really failed.

We had a head start and completely blew it. Basically the Alamo bowl 2.0 (too soon?).


Do you think a country wide shut down like Italy is imminent? I know it's probably the right thing to do but I have a hard time seeing it happen in the US. Just because we're Americans and what not.

Also, the US death toll is way lower than Italy and China, why is that?
NVM
onaduck
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We are officially #1 now. I thought it might take 24 hours late last night. It took 12ish. We might hit 20,000 positive tests today alone. It's going to be close.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.