OT: CV Looking Forward

[Ricky C]

It is not clear how to project mortality numbers in the US. We are presently at 482,000 active cases with 30,000 recovered and 20,000 dead. Without accounting in detail for the difference in time it takes for a case to be resolved through recovery and death, these are grim numbers.

Looking backwards, it was three weeks ago that we had just 30,000 current cases and only a couple of days later than we had 50,000. Even if we assume that deaths happen a week sooner than that, it puts the deaths from the active cases about the end of March with a total count of 144,000. That would mean of the confirmed infection count 20,000 of 144,000 have died, or 13%.. With a current active case count of half a million, that would put us at a total death count just from current infections of 65,000.

If we use the Chinese number of around 4% death rate of the confirmed cases, that puts us at 20,000 deaths from the present 500,000 which we have already reached. So clearly the death rate is higher than 4% in the US as a fraction of confirmed cases.

We have no way of knowing the numbers of asymptomatic cases. So it only makes sense to calculate estimates of death rates on the confirmed cases. These numbers are appropriate and are of value as long as it is clear they only apply to the number of confirmed cases. No point in trying to count ghosts we can't see.

Once again this disease has surprised me at its steady march forward. This is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being biased. I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the government has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distancing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as we would like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

It's pretty clear to me at this point that 100,000 deaths is a very optimistic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or two.

This is no flu, no matter what Trump or Larkin say. This disease is going to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 7:59:37 PM UTC+10, Ricky C wrote:

It is not clear how to project mortality numbers in the US. We are presently at 482,000 active cases with 30,000 recovered and 20,000 dead. Without accounting in detail for the difference in time it takes for a case to be resolved through recovery and death, these are grim numbers.

Looking backwards, it was three weeks ago that we had just 30,000 current cases and only a couple of days later than we had 50,000. Even if we assume that deaths happen a week sooner than that, it puts the deaths from the active cases about the end of March with a total count of 144,000. That would mean of the confirmed infection count 20,000 of 144,000 have died, or 13%. With a current active case count of half a million, that would put us at a total death count just from current infections of 65,000.

If we use the Chinese number of around 4% death rate of the confirmed cases, that puts us at 20,000 deaths from the present 500,000 which we have already reached. So clearly the death rate is higher than 4% in the US as a fraction of confirmed cases.

We have no way of knowing the numbers of asymptomatic cases. So it only makes sense to calculate estimates of death rates on the confirmed cases. These numbers are appropriate and are of value as long as it is clear they only apply to the number of confirmed cases. No point in trying to count ghosts we can't see.

Once again this disease has surprised me at its steady march forward. This is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being biased.. I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the government has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distancing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as we would like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

It's pretty clear to me at this point that 100,000 deaths is a very optimistic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or two.

This is no flu, no matter what Trump or Larkin say. This disease is going to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

Some won't around to remember anything.

A couple of weeks ago John Larkin was telling us that he had a parts per million changes of catching the disease.

At the time - as a US resident - he actually had a 46 ppm chance of having the disease.

California is now up to 572 cases per million population. New York is at 9,233.

The new case rate for the USA as whole is still running at a steady 30,000 new cases per day, and John Larkin is bleating about the infection having peaked.

At the current rate it would take 28 years to infect the whole country.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

It might be sensible to note that the three worst hit states - New York, New Jersey and Louisiana - have now got about half the total infections in the US as a whole. They contain about 10% of the whole population.

The other 48 states may get the message, or may go on to get just as bad or worse.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 5:32:37 AM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 7:59:37 PM UTC+10, Ricky C wrote:
It is not clear how to project mortality numbers in the US. We are presently at 482,000 active cases with 30,000 recovered and 20,000 dead. Without accounting in detail for the difference in time it takes for a case to be resolved through recovery and death, these are grim numbers.

Looking backwards, it was three weeks ago that we had just 30,000 current cases and only a couple of days later than we had 50,000. Even if we assume that deaths happen a week sooner than that, it puts the deaths from the active cases about the end of March with a total count of 144,000. That would mean of the confirmed infection count 20,000 of 144,000 have died, or 13%. With a current active case count of half a million, that would put us at a total death count just from current infections of 65,000.

If we use the Chinese number of around 4% death rate of the confirmed cases, that puts us at 20,000 deaths from the present 500,000 which we have already reached. So clearly the death rate is higher than 4% in the US as a fraction of confirmed cases.

We have no way of knowing the numbers of asymptomatic cases. So it only makes sense to calculate estimates of death rates on the confirmed cases. These numbers are appropriate and are of value as long as it is clear they only apply to the number of confirmed cases. No point in trying to count ghosts we can't see.

Once again this disease has surprised me at its steady march forward. This is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being biased. I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the government has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distancing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as we would like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

It's pretty clear to me at this point that 100,000 deaths is a very optimistic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or two.

This is no flu, no matter what Trump or Larkin say. This disease is going to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

Some won't around to remember anything.

A couple of weeks ago John Larkin was telling us that he had a parts per million changes of catching the disease.

At the time - as a US resident - he actually had a 46 ppm chance of having the disease.

California is now up to 572 cases per million population. New York is at 9,233.

The new case rate for the USA as whole is still running at a steady 30,000 new cases per day, and John Larkin is bleating about the infection having peaked.

At the current rate it would take 28 years to infect the whole country.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

It might be sensible to note that the three worst hit states - New York, New Jersey and Louisiana - have now got about half the total infections in the US as a whole. They contain about 10% of the whole population.

The other 48 states may get the message, or may go on to get just as bad or worse.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

NOW you are talking about INFECTION RATES! WTF happened to R0? Gone with the wind? Are you fucking "STUPD"?

 

[Flyguy]

On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 2:59:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky C wrote:

It is not clear how to project mortality numbers in the US. We are presently at 482,000 active cases with 30,000 recovered and 20,000 dead. Without accounting in detail for the difference in time it takes for a case to be resolved through recovery and death, these are grim numbers.

Looking backwards, it was three weeks ago that we had just 30,000 current cases and only a couple of days later than we had 50,000. Even if we assume that deaths happen a week sooner than that, it puts the deaths from the active cases about the end of March with a total count of 144,000. That would mean of the confirmed infection count 20,000 of 144,000 have died, or 13%. With a current active case count of half a million, that would put us at a total death count just from current infections of 65,000.

If we use the Chinese number of around 4% death rate of the confirmed cases, that puts us at 20,000 deaths from the present 500,000 which we have already reached. So clearly the death rate is higher than 4% in the US as a fraction of confirmed cases.

We have no way of knowing the numbers of asymptomatic cases. So it only makes sense to calculate estimates of death rates on the confirmed cases. These numbers are appropriate and are of value as long as it is clear they only apply to the number of confirmed cases. No point in trying to count ghosts we can't see.

Once again this disease has surprised me at its steady march forward. This is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being biased.. I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the government has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distancing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as we would like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

It's pretty clear to me at this point that 100,000 deaths is a very optimistic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or two.

This is no flu, no matter what Trump or Larkin say. This disease is going to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

First, the Chicomms are proven liars and not to be trusted.

Second, the models VASTLY over-predicted the death count and have been modified downward by a factor of FOUR.

BTW, this was SCIENCE speaking, so you can get a rude awakening on how accurate science is at predicting things, even just a few weeks in advance.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, April 14, 2020 at 3:51:48 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:

On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 5:32:37 AM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 7:59:37 PM UTC+10, Ricky C wrote:

This is no flu, no matter what Trump or Larkin say. This disease is going to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

Some won't around to remember anything.

A couple of weeks ago John Larkin was telling us that he had a parts per million chance of catching the disease.

At the time - as a US resident - he actually had a 46 ppm chance of having the disease.

California is now up to 572 cases per million population. New York is at 9,233.

The new case rate for the USA as whole is still running at a steady 30,000 new cases per day, and John Larkin is bleating about the infection having peaked.

At the current rate it would take 28 years to infect the whole country.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

It might be sensible to note that the three worst hit states - New York, New Jersey and Louisiana - have now got about half the total infections in the US as a whole. They contain about 10% of the whole population.

The other 48 states may get the message, or may go on to get just as bad or worse.

NOW you are talking about INFECTION RATES! WTF happened to R0? Gone with the wind? Are you fucking "STUPID"?

I was talking about the proportion of the population infected a few weeks ago, versus the proportion infected now.

The new case per day for the US rate has stabilised, so the R0 has to be close to one - averaged over the states that are generating most of the new cases.

The numbers don't say anything about the progress of the epidemic in states where a smaller proportion of the population is currently infected.

You are much too dim to realise the implications of what I wrote, so the fact that I didn't explicitly mention R0 did attract your feeble attention, and prompted this particularly moronic and irrelevant outburst.

Rick C seems to have nailed you. AlwaysIrrelevant does fit.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, April 14, 2020 at 3:49:47 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 2:59:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky C wrote:

<snip>

> First, the Chicomms are proven liars and not to be trusted.

Flyguy is a proven idiot who regularly posts total nonsense.

He clearly hasn't got the faintest idea what might constitute proof.

> Second, the models VASTLY over-predicted the death count and have been modified downward by a factor of FOUR.

What's that got to do with anything.

> BTW, this was SCIENCE speaking, so you can get a rude awakening on how accurate science is at predicting things, even just a few weeks in advance.

Modelling isn't an exact science, something that it's practitioners are well aware of, even if Flyguy isn't. Flyguy's brain isn't dormant - it just doesn't work - and his chance of having a rude awakening - to precisely how idiotic he is - is remote.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 22:49:42 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
<soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 2:59:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky C wrote:
It is not clear how to project mortality numbers in the US. We are presently at 482,000 active cases with 30,000 recovered and 20,000 dead. Without accounting in detail for the difference in time it takes for a case to be resolved through recovery and death, these are grim numbers.

Looking backwards, it was three weeks ago that we had just 30,000 current cases and only a couple of days later than we had 50,000. Even if we assume that deaths happen a week sooner than that, it puts the deaths from the active cases about the end of March with a total count of 144,000. That would mean of the confirmed infection count 20,000 of 144,000 have died, or 13%. With a current active case count of half a million, that would put us at a total death count just from current infections of 65,000.

If we use the Chinese number of around 4% death rate of the confirmed cases, that puts us at 20,000 deaths from the present 500,000 which we have already reached. So clearly the death rate is higher than 4% in the US as a fraction of confirmed cases.

We have no way of knowing the numbers of asymptomatic cases. So it only makes sense to calculate estimates of death rates on the confirmed cases. These numbers are appropriate and are of value as long as it is clear they only apply to the number of confirmed cases. No point in trying to count ghosts we can't see.

Once again this disease has surprised me at its steady march forward. This is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being biased. I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the government has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distancing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as we would like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

It's pretty clear to me at this point that 100,000 deaths is a very optimistic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or two.

This is no flu, no matter what Trump or Larkin say. This disease is going to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

First, the Chicomms are proven liars and not to be trusted.

Second, the models VASTLY over-predicted the death count and have been modified downward by a factor of FOUR.

After it's over, you can probably shop around and find scientific
estimates that were off by a factor of 100.

BTW, this was SCIENCE speaking, so you can get a rude awakening on how accurate science is at predicting things, even just a few weeks in advance.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[Ricky C]

On Tuesday, April 14, 2020 at 12:25:19 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 22:49:42 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 2:59:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky C wrote:
It is not clear how to project mortality numbers in the US. We are presently at 482,000 active cases with 30,000 recovered and 20,000 dead. Without accounting in detail for the difference in time it takes for a case to be resolved through recovery and death, these are grim numbers.

Looking backwards, it was three weeks ago that we had just 30,000 current cases and only a couple of days later than we had 50,000. Even if we assume that deaths happen a week sooner than that, it puts the deaths from the active cases about the end of March with a total count of 144,000. That would mean of the confirmed infection count 20,000 of 144,000 have died, or 13%. With a current active case count of half a million, that would put us at a total death count just from current infections of 65,000.

If we use the Chinese number of around 4% death rate of the confirmed cases, that puts us at 20,000 deaths from the present 500,000 which we have already reached. So clearly the death rate is higher than 4% in the US as a fraction of confirmed cases.

We have no way of knowing the numbers of asymptomatic cases. So it only makes sense to calculate estimates of death rates on the confirmed cases.. These numbers are appropriate and are of value as long as it is clear they only apply to the number of confirmed cases. No point in trying to count ghosts we can't see.

Once again this disease has surprised me at its steady march forward. This is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being biased. I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the government has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distancing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as we would like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

It's pretty clear to me at this point that 100,000 deaths is a very optimistic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or two.

This is no flu, no matter what Trump or Larkin say. This disease is going to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

First, the Chicomms are proven liars and not to be trusted.

Second, the models VASTLY over-predicted the death count and have been modified downward by a factor of FOUR.

After it's over, you can probably shop around and find scientific
estimates that were off by a factor of 100.

By "scientific estimates" you mean SWAGs? Yes, you can also get many an estimate on any street corner... well, maybe not so much now. I think street corners are not so populated now.

Certainly you can get many a SWAG in newsgroups!

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, April 14, 2020 at 9:25:19 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

After it's over, you can probably shop around and find scientific
estimates that were off by a factor of 100.

Estimates of what? Every attempt to deal with a disease CHANGES THE ENVIRONMENT
and the estimates, naturally, have to change as well. Nothing wrong there,
just a case of effective controls put into place.

You're saying 'probably' without any data, again. For a self-proclaimed skeptic, that's a sin.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, April 15, 2020 at 2:25:19 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 22:49:42 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sunday, April 12, 2020 at 2:59:37 AM UTC-7, Ricky C wrote:

<snip>

Once again this disease has surprised me at its steady march forward. This is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being biased. I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the government has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distancing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as we would like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

It's pretty clear to me at this point that 100,000 deaths is a very optimistic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or two.

This is no flu, no matter what Trump or Larkin say. This disease is going to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

<snip>

> >First, the Chicomms are proven liars and not to be trusted.

Flyguy never misses an opportunity to claim this. He's never provided any relevant evidence, so it is just one meaningless bit of decoration.

> >Second, the models VASTLY over-predicted the death count and have been modified downward by a factor of FOUR.

There are lots of models, modelling lots of different ways society could have reacted to the pandemic. US society reacted incompetently, and has had lots of infections and lots of deaths. China, South Korea, Taiwan and Australia have reacted better and had many fewer infections and deaths. There are probably model results around that cover an even larger range - that's what models are for.

After it's over, you can probably shop around and find scientific
estimates that were off by a factor of 100.

If you are looking at the results alone, without looking at the assumptions they were testing.

John Larkin doesn't seem to have a clue why people construct simulations, what they expected to find out by running them, and what the results actually meant.

Modelling at fatuously extreme worst case - sub-Trump - might have predicted even more US deaths than you have seen.

> >BTW, this was SCIENCE speaking, so you can get a rude awakening on how accurate science is at predicting things, even just a few weeks in advance.

Modelling isn't an exact science, something that it's practitioners are well aware of, even if Flyguy isn't. Flyguy's brain isn't dormant - it just doesn't work - and his chance of having a rude awakening - to precisely how idiotic he is - is remote.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney