Novel Coronavirus

[Canoez]

We're getting inured to the numbers.

We should not.

Also : "
"More than 90% of the population remains susceptible" to Covid-19, CDC director says"

[George.]

It is absurd to believe that 1/2 are going to immediately stop the smart practices (remember I am talking about people who are currently doing the right thing) and even more absurd to believe they will continue to ignore safe practices if another surge occurs.

On the contrary, that is exactly what to expect when there is no leadership, based on herd mentality. Half the people are being half as careful, as evidenced by the case numbers rising again. When another surge occurs, there will be a lag before it is detected and widely known by the public. The herd will then panic and behave again, but deaths will continue to rise for a month, before taking a further month to drop back to pre-surge levels.

[peb]

On the contrary, that is exactly what to expect when there is no leadership, based on herd mentality. Half the people are being half as careful, as evidenced by the case numbers rising again. When another surge occurs, there will be a lag before it is detected and widely known by the public. The herd will then panic and behave again, but deaths will continue to rise for a month, before taking a further month to drop back to pre-surge levels.

Note the word "immediately", which I can assure you has not happened yet. But it would take the immediate abandonment of a large percentage of people from their current practices to get to the numbers that you are forecasting. On top of that, it would take the continued abandonment of the social distancing and masks practices to maintain the numbers you are projecting. If that is to be expected without good leadership, why did it not happen in June and July?

We have lots of examples over the last six months of how this plays out at this time. One cannot reasonably forectast 400K deaths by the end of the year (or even 150K, which is what your prediction roughly would work out to if you did the math).

[Canoez]

Yeah, and nobody predicted 200,000 deaths by now, either, right?

[peb]

Yeah, and nobody predicted 200,000 deaths by now, either, right?

Actually, I did. My predictions since late July have been pretty dang accurate. I have to go back and see what I predicted by Oct and November, but I believe I said we would be around 240 by Thanksgiving, but I did not rule out 275 or even 300 by thanksgiving. I would have to go back and check again, to see exactly what the predictions were.

ETA:

Ok, I went back and looked and foudn this from Aug 3rd, post 3539 on this thread:

I agree, likely 30-40K deaths in August, if drop off of new cases continues, probably around 20-30K in September. Assuming 20K in October, puts us at around 240K deaths into November, what I have been projecting along with some established projections.

So I said 20-30K in September, we have had 17,651 thru september so far, at our current rate, over the next 8 days aroudn 6000, so that will be aroudn 23K to 24K in September. Which is right in the range I predicted. If one looks at where I said we would be in November , and subtract the 20K I predicted for the October, that would put my prediction at 220K at the end of September.

[LeeG]

Make fun all you want, but it is obvious to anyone with basic arithmetic skills that to reach 200K deaths by Christmas, we would have to reach a death rate of 2000 deaths per day immediately, and hold at that level for 100 days. Or take a month to reach that and hold at 2500 per day for 2 months. We have not been above 2000 deaths per day since April, and then for only around 3 weeks. And we are currently at 768 and trending down. Also, the case rate fatality in April was around 4 percent then, it's around 2 now.

So no reasonable projection, at this time, should be presenting 400K deaths by Christmas. So if that us published, what's the motivation? My only answer us to instill panic.

Sure I’ll make fun of your characterizing worst case projections as “panic porn”. You are implying that people should not model worst case scenarios but only “reasonable” ones that don’t elicit negative emotions. How about considering models as a tool to see how various factors contribute to possible outcomes. So IF x,y,z happen the possible outcome is “____”. As long as the person relaying this projection specifies the parameters it’s useful.

I just find your mistrust of media and people as purveyors of “panic porn” coincides with Trumpian attempts to discredit the press in general.

That all said would it surprise you to see 100,000 more fatalities by the end of the year as other flus coincide with Covid19 and another 100,000 by the end of 2021?

[Canoez]

I am keeping half an eye on what happened in 2003 with SARS. That was an easier virus to contain because it could only be transmitted by someone who showed symptoms of it, but the containment methods were not so well developed as they are now.

In the USA 29 cases were reported, eight tested positive for SARS-CoV virus and none were fatal. (Source-CDC)

in the UK 6 cases were reported, four tested positive for SARS-CoV and none were fatal (Source -NHS)

Just a reminder of where we were - or thought we were on February 7th.

[peb]

Sure I’ll make fun of your characterizing worst case projections as “panic porn”. You are implying that people should not model worst case scenarios but only “reasonable” ones that don’t elicit negative emotions. How about considering models as a tool to see how various factors contribute to possible outcomes. So IF x,y,z happen the possible outcome is “____”. As long as the person relaying this projection specifies the parameters it’s useful.

I just find your mistrust of media and people as purveyors of “panic porn” coincides with Trumpian attempts to discredit the press in general.

That all said would it surprise you to see 100,000 more fatalities by the end of the year as other flus coincide with Covid19 and another 100,000 by the end of 2021?

No, if one looks at the Univerisity of Washington web site, when they model worse case predictions, that is worthwhile. One can read their FAQ and see that we now know people won't live that way. What I am saying is panic porn is taking those worse case predictions, which serve a scientific purpose (albeit not much of one for the purpose of the next 2 or 3 months), and making the statement "I have seen projections that show X", when we know X won't happen, or a headline that says: "Experts warn U.S. covid-19 deaths could more than double by year’s end". Taking the scientist's worse case model, which is highly unlikely and everyone knows it at this time, and putting up that headline is panic porn, pure and simply.

NOTE: even the University of Washington projections are way overstates, and have a history for being so. But that can be beside the point.

ETA: I pretty much ignore what Trump or his media say about Covid-19. The press, with regards to covid-19, in general has done a pitiful job of presenting objective information to the public. Some of the deaths are on their doorstep.

As to "That all said would it surprise you to see 100,000 more fatalities by the end of the year as other flus coincide with Covid19 and another 100,000 by the end of 2021"?
Yes I would be surprised, 100K could happen, but is unlikely IMO. I do not think flu season has much to do with it. I suspect we will have a light flu season. I would be surprised if social distancing and masks, which are working to some extent with covid-19, a disease which is certainly appears to be more contagious than the flu, do not have the effect of lessoning the amount of flu people get. I also suspect that more people will get flu vaccines this year, but that is just a guess also. And typically the flu season doesn't kick into gear until December. So I would be surprised, but it could happen. I do think we will see some minor spikes in covid-19 throughout the winter months. But nothing on the order as being spoken about on this thread (eg exponential increases).

[George Jung]

I agree with LeeG - making projections based on 'worse case' scenarios, under various conditions - 'how well are we following guidelines' - is useful - esp in motivating the public to follow recommendations. It's mitigation we're after. 'Less' is our goal.

I find that our locals are experiencing Covid fatigue - and a large number are RWW's, getting their 'guidance' from trump, fox, breitbart et al. They are not following guidance, and I've no doubt it'll bite us. My nephew and his wife (RN) are positive - found out right after a large family gathering, so lots of exposure. And most of them won't get tested - 'no symptoms'. The CDC has been corrupted by trump and HHS, their recommendations are all over the place - and they've lost their reliability/reputation as a result.

We'll see.

[peb]

I agree with LeeG - making projections based on 'worse case' scenarios, under various conditions - 'how well are we following guidelines' - is useful - esp in motivating the public to follow recommendations. It's mitigation we're after. 'Less' is our goal.

I find that our locals are experiencing Covid fatigue - and a large number are RWW's, getting their 'guidance' from trump, fox, breitbart et al. They are not following guidance, and I've no doubt it'll bite us. My nephew and his wife (RN) are positive - found out right after a large family gathering, so lots of exposure. And most of them won't get tested - 'no symptoms'. The CDC has been corrupted by trump and HHS, their recommendations are all over the place - and they've lost their reliability/reputation as a result.

We'll see.

So the idea is to lie to the public, they cannot handle the truth. Make no mistake about it, the intent of the headline from the washington post article is to present an untruth (ie lie). It is worse case only under the assumption we do absolutely nothing (that may be an exageration) to mitigate the disease. We know from the history of the last few months, that will not happen.

I suppose your attitude is "the public cannot responsiblily deal with the truth, so lets not tell them that".

[George.]

Jesus, peb. The idea is to tell the public what will happen if they let their guard down, or listen to Trump. If they do, those scenarios are probably too optimistic.

[Sky Blue]

Is this the same "George." that thought that the US would be like Italy and that millions would die?

Just checking.

[TomF]

peb, the province of Ontario is facing serious upticks in infections, due mostly to people under age 40 not following the guidelines. Gathering in house parties, gathering at family cottages, figuring that even if they get the damned thing they'll be fine.

The Premier has responded by telling them the damned truth: they're stupid @sses who are risking everyone's health, and all the progress made so far for the sake of what ... of having a few beers? Ford isn't pulling punches with his rhetoric, and is backing his words up with stiff fines.

Has introduced fines of up to $10K for hosting a house party which breaks the rules, and up to $750 per attendee at such a party.

Because Ontario's had a helluva wallop to vulnerable populations from COVID, and it would take very little to set the thing aflame again in hospitals and long term care homes. Burn through another few hundred lives, or more.

COVID doesn't care if someone's faithfully masked-up or missed travel to vacations or postponed an annual party, if you permit a vector for transmission now. That's the point. It's still out there in the population, and the only way to slow the f#cking thing is by exercising discipline.

[peb]

peb, the province of Ontario is facing serious upticks in infections, due mostly to people under age 40 not following the guidelines. Gathering in house parties, gathering at family cottages, figuring that even if they get the damned thing they'll be fine.

The Premier has responded by telling them the damned truth: they're stupid @sses who are risking everyone's health, and all the progress made so far for the sake of what ... of having a few beers? Ford isn't pulling punches with his rhetoric, and is backing his words up with stiff fines.

Has introduced fines of up to $10K for hosting a house party which breaks the rules, and up to $750 per attendee at such a party.

Because Ontario's had a helluva wallop to vulnerable populations from COVID, and it would take very little to set the thing aflame again in hospitals and long term care homes. Burn through another few hundred lives, or more.

COVID doesn't care if someone's faithfully masked-up or missed travel to vacations or postponed an annual party, if you permit a vector for transmission now. That's the point. It's still out there in the population, and the only way to slow the f#cking thing is by exercising discipline.

I understand, people gettig covid fatigue and stopping behaving is a problem. I am not arguing. My point is that we will not, in any way, shape or form be at 400K deaths in the US by decemember. Period. When there is an uptick, people take action. We know that now. We have umpteen examples of it. People will not blindly go on about their business while the numbers rise exponentially.

[George.]

Is this the same "George." that thought that the US would be like Italy and that millions would die?

Just checking.

In case you haven't noticed, the US has already passed Italy in deaths per million. 622 to 592, and US deaths are growing a lot faster.

Millions die? You may get there yet. But hopefully it will be no worse than my actual predictions, which you can find if you read this thread from the beginning.

[George Jung]

So the idea is to lie to the public, they cannot handle the truth. Make no mistake about it, the intent of the headline from the washington post article is to present an untruth (ie lie). It is worse case only under the assumption we do absolutely nothing (that may be an exageration) to mitigate the disease. We know from the history of the last few months, that will not happen.

I suppose your attitude is "the public cannot responsiblily deal with the truth, so lets not tell them that".

Good grief! Quit the strawman, already! I see Gdot has already disabused you of that 'impression'. This really isn't 'that difficult' - but you seem to be striving to do so.

[TomF]

Not enough people take action; we have umpteen examples of that too. Premier Ford is imposing those fines because an objectively small slice of Ontario's population is putting the rest at risk - and it's not like the folks flouting the rules haven't understood the rules.

Do you imagine, peb, that states like Florida or Mississippi or South Dakota are about to impose $10K fines on people who host parties for more than 10 people? Really?

What would make you think so?

[LeeG]

So the idea is to lie to the public, they cannot handle the truth. Make no mistake about it, the intent of the headline from the washington post article is to present an untruth (ie lie). It is worse case only under the assumption we do absolutely nothing (that may be an exageration) to mitigate the disease. We know from the history of the last few months, that will not happen.

I suppose your attitude is "the public cannot responsiblily deal with the truth, so lets not tell them that".

ok now you’re being hysterical. The WaPo article explained the range in the projections. It never said there will be 400,000 deaths.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...c29_story.html

The U.S. death toll from covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, now stands at 183,000, according to health data analyzed by The Washington Post. The IHME model projects that under the most likely scenario, 410,451 people in the United States will have died by Jan. 1.
The best-case scenario is 288,381 deaths and worst-case is 620,029, that model forecasts.
The scenarios pivot on human behavior and public policy. The best-case scenario would result from near-universal mask-wearing and the maintenance of social distancing and government mandates limiting the size of indoor gatherings. The worst-case scenario assumes that people and their communities stop taking precautions.
.
.
Few models forecast as far into the future as IHME does. Many do not project further than four to six weeks ahead.
“Beyond that, it’s all conjecture and guesswork because there are so many factors we just can’t predict and factors about transmission that truthfully scientists don’t understand very well yet,” said Jeffrey Shaman, an infectious-disease expert who leads the modeling team at Columbia University. “What happens the next few months really depends on what we do as a society the next few weeks.”

[George Jung]

I've been picking up some 'new' pt's lately - usually middle/older white guys who are trumpsters, and believe Covid 19 is 'fake news'. Come here after kicked out of their previous offices.

Interestingly - and predictably - arguing with them doesn't work, just get's 'em worked up. But telling them ' ya gotta wear one here - I'm old! Yer protecting me!' has worked better.

An aside - number of admits/icu/vent cases has gone up significantly, locally, in last week or so.

[TomF]

Stay as safe as possible, good Dr. Don't let a lapse expose you to more risk from one of those folks...

[peb]

Not enough people take action; we have umpteen examples of that too. Premier Ford is imposing those fines because an objectively small slice of Ontario's population is putting the rest at risk - and it's not like the folks flouting the rules haven't understood the rules.

Do you imagine, peb, that states like Florida or Mississippi or South Dakota are about to impose $10K fines on people who host parties for more than 10 people? Really?

What would make you think so?

Of course not enough people take the proper actions, thats one of the reasons why why we have had 200K deaths. But those have been spread over 6 months. Now, we are supposed to believe that the deaths will double in 3 months. So forget the people who are not behaving now, we are supposed to bleive that the vast majority of those who do maintain social distancing, wear masks, etc are going to suddenly stop doing so AND are going to continue their lax behavior as case counts rise to very high levels. Its an absurd idea.

And telling people its going to be worse than it is is hurting the situation, badly in my opinion. People no longer have any faith in what we are being told and more will quit social distancing than would have.

Panic porn folks have deaths on their hands.

[peb]

I've been picking up some 'new' pt's lately - usually middle/older white guys who are trumpsters, and believe Covid 19 is 'fake news'. Come here after kicked out of their previous offices.

Interestingly - and predictably - arguing with them doesn't work, just get's 'em worked up. But telling them ' ya gotta wear one here - I'm old! Yer protecting me!' has worked better.

An aside - number of admits/icu/vent cases has gone up significantly, locally, in last week or so.

Yes, one of the reasons they believe it is fake news is because of the extreme and dire forecasts we are continually bombarded with that never come to fruition.

[Canoez]

Yes, one of the reasons they believe it is fake news is because of the extreme and dire forecasts we are continually bombarded with that never come to fruition.

I think 200,000 dead and 7,000,000 infected in the US is a pretty dire thing to come to fruition. It's the people that choose to deny those numbers like Holocaust deniers that really get me.

[peb]

I think 200,000 dead and 7,000,000 infected in the US is a pretty dire thing to come to fruition. It's the people that choose to deny those numbers like Holocaust deniers that really get me.

They are not denying those numbers.

[TomF]

The virus is not merely contained geographically to the big coastal cities, peb. It's neatly distributed all through America's small city, town, and rural heartland. All through the places which are so deeply Trumpist Red that a shocking proportion will not take any damned precautions because COVID is a FAKE VIRUS created out of thin air by LIBRUL ELITES to take down the USA USA USA ...

These folks, peb, to my deep horror, will continue to sicken, spread the virus, and die because they would rather identify with Trump and his ongoing public mockery of public health measures (consider his recent rallies) than accept that maybe the experts (and particularly the Dems who try to spread the experts' advice) were right about something.

That is, Trump's supporters are in particular the people at highest risk of contracting, then spreading the virus. Because they've a sociological imperative against doing what we agree is the only present way to depress infections, which is being inflamed daily by the President.

Yeah, you might hit 400K deaths sooner rather than later, but the locations of those deaths will not be New York or San Francisco. They'll be in the towns and small cities of Red-voting America, where there's sufficient population density to transmit the virus easily, matched with a fairly thinly spread capacity to provide really high-intensity care. And where the population is deeply convinced that the virus is a gimmick rather than a threat.

[Canoez]

They are not denying those numbers.

There are those who do.

[peb]

The virus is not merely contained geographically to the big coastal cities, peb. It's neatly distributed all through America's small city, town, and rural heartland. All through the places which are so deeply Trumpist Red that a shocking proportion will not take any damned precautions because COVID is a FAKE VIRUS created out of thin air by LIBRUL ELITES to take down the USA USA USA ...

These folks, peb, to my deep horror, will continue to sicken, spread the virus, and die because they would rather identify with Trump and his ongoing public mockery of public health measures (consider his recent rallies) than accept that maybe the experts (and particularly the Dems who try to spread the experts' advice) were right about something.

That is, Trump's supporters are in particular the people at highest risk of contracting, then spreading the virus. Because they've a sociological imperative against doing what we agree is the only present way to depress infections, which is being inflamed daily by the President.

Yeah, you might hit 400K deaths sooner rather than later, but the locations of those deaths will not be New York or San Francisco. They'll be in the towns and small cities of Red-voting America, where there's sufficient population density to transmit the virus easily, matched with a fairly thinly spread capacity to provide really high-intensity care. And where the population is deeply convinced that the virus is a gimmick rather than a threat.

I fully understand that the virus is in the small towns and rural America, it has been a while. A while back a member of this forum from a small Texas county stated he was glad he lived in a small county and was safe. I pointed out to him that random samplings of small counties in TX show a case rate and death rate per population pretty much inline with the big citites. DOesn't affect my point at all. I am sure you love to make this particular conversation all about Trump. I don't see how it is. The issue is, is at all possible for us to have 400K deaths by Christmas? The answer is "no". What Trump does or does not do does not bear on the answer.

[TomF]

It is absolutely possible to have 400K deaths by Christmas - though I suspect the deaths will be maybe "only" 100K more by then.

The reason it's possible is because of the sociological factors that Trump's inflaming. His public rhetoric mocking mask wearing is the reason that so many in those Red towns will not take the precautions which would stave off more infections and deaths.

It isn't all about Trump; it's about denying vectors for an opportunistic virus to find new hosts.

The only reason that this is about Trump even tangentially is because he's found political advantage in making it so. What's shocking is that had he been even somewhat competent in fighting the pandemic through embracing public health measures, he'd be in a far better position to win the Presidency again without cheating.

[peb]

Meanwhile, on the "a lot more of us might have had an infection than we would ever expect" front:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...796v1.full.pdf

Lets put this in context: Japan has had 629 confrmed cases per million population (thats cases, not deaths).

People in Tokyo from disparate locations but the same employer were given antibody test in April and then again in late August. Seroprevalence increased from 5.8% (Higher than I would have guessed for Japan in April by an order of magnitude) to 46% in late August. Unbelievable. If it is anywhere close to accurate, there is something really weird about Japan or lots of people have been infected.

[peb]

It is absolutely possible to have 400K deaths by Christmas - though I suspect the deaths will be maybe "only" 100K more by then.

The reason it's possible is because of the sociological factors that Trump's inflaming. His public rhetoric mocking mask wearing is the reason that so many in those Red towns will not take the precautions which would stave off more infections and deaths.

It isn't all about Trump; it's about denying vectors for an opportunistic virus to find new hosts.

The only reason that this is about Trump even tangentially is because he's found political advantage in making it so. What's shocking is that had he been even somewhat competent in fighting the pandemic through embracing public health measures, he'd be in a far better position to win the Presidency again without cheating.

No Tom, its not. I did the math above. You would have to have well over half of the people who today are behaving properly with respect to covid) stop tomorrow wearing masks, social distancing etc, and stay that way. Then you might get to that number. But what the heck could Trump do today that would cause half the people who have not quit wearing masks up until now, to sunddenly quit? Do you ascribe the man mind-control powers?

[George.]

I posted this on April 17:

One thing I learned in this pandemic is how much even the people who understand science tend to downplay the prognosis when it is too terrible. Part of it, no doubt, is fear of going on record with a dire forecast. If you are a public figure or institution, on the off chance it doesn't happen, you will be remembered as a famous scaremonger and your reputation would be wrecked. Low probability, high consequence outcome to be avoided.

Case in point: Fauci et al speculating that deaths will be around 60 thousand in the US. This never fit the data, and with 36 thousand dead already, even if the pandemic peaked now you would get as many deaths on the downslope. In reality, the pandemic is nowhere near peaking - the death rate curve has been flattened by the lockdowns, and at best it will level off at current levels (2000+ deaths/day) for quite a while. Even if you assume that 10% of the population has been already infected (highly unlikely), you would still get six times more deaths before that proportion reaches 60% and herd immunity.

So at this point it would be safe to say that the 60,000 deaths figure is no longer a possibility, even in a best case scenario. 300 thousand is far more likely, even with the current lockdown. But don't expect authorities to admit that before it becomes obvious to most people.

Has it become obvious to most people yet?

300,000 is now the best-case scenario, assuming people take all precautions and a vaccine becomes available by early next year. 400,000 is far from the worst case scenario.

[TomF]

In contrast, in Canada the seroprevalence nationwide is under 3%. Under 6% in the regions which suffered the largest outbreaks and # of deaths.

Fauci answered Rand Paul on this in Senate hearings today - Paul pointed out 22% estimated seroprevalence in (I think) New York, and mumbled about how herd immunity might be an option. Fauci smacked him back hard, responding that Paul's comments were dangerous. That Rand Paul was perhaps the only one who thought that 22% made a case for herd immunity.

[TomF]

I posted this on April 17:



Has it become obvious to most people yet?

300,000 is now the best-case scenario, assuming people take all precautions and a vaccine becomes available by early next year. 400,000 is far from the worst case scenario.

Agreed, George.

[TomF]

No Tom, its not. I did the math above. You would have to have well over half of the people who today are behaving properly with respect to covid) stop tomorrow wearing masks, social distancing etc, and stay that way. Then you might get to that number. But what the heck could Trump do today that would cause half the people who have not quit wearing masks up until now, to sunddenly quit? Do you ascribe the man mind-control powers?

IIRC South Dakota recently had a 27% positivity rate for their testing. Over a quarter of South Dakotans just walking around tested positive - and hence are infectious.

I do not believe that the remaining 3/4 of South Dakotans all wear masks, or even that half of them do. It would be freaking simple to infect a huge number just by going to church. Or going to work. Or going to school. Or going to a family gathering for a baby shower or etc. In fact, that's exactly how Ontario's daily case count roughly tripled in the past 4 weeks, and a clear majority of Ontarians are doing all the mask/social distance stuff.

It takes very little to open a vector for transmission, and in much of America we're seeing people in specific political groups do all in their power to show their loyalty by NOT closing those vectors. By thumbing their noses at them.

[skuthorp]

If the pool of infected grows too large then most practical precautions will not be effective.