US COVID-19 Infection Rate Still not Peaked

[keith wright]

On Tuesday, 21 April 2020 08:56:20 UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
...

The US is doing a rotten job of slowing down the epidemic - and there's a whole lot of the country that doesn't seem to have enough people get sick to take the issue seriously.

California - with 865 infections per million inhabitants - a tenth of New York's
level - does seem to be one of the them.
...

California and in particular the SF bay area where I live seem to be doing a reasonable job.

Most of the people are taking it seriously (except for Larkin who lives in the same region).

Also, many of the companies here, such as Apple for whom I work, are supporting their employees and the community to the best of their abilities. Me and most of my colleagues are able to work fairly effectively from home.

The infection rate is declining, although not as rapidly as I would have hoped, and the medical system is still running within its capabilities - it would only take a factor of two increase though to overwhelm some of the available resources.

https://www.sccgov.org/sites/phd/DiseaseInformation/novel-coronavirus/Pages/dashboard.aspx

kw

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:24:16 AM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:

> The issue is, are more people dying or are fewer dying?

Nonsense, that is NOT the issue. We must, collectively,
implement measures to eliminate (or at least limit) a plague.
Deaths, injuries, and discomfort, as well as the drain on various
resources, are all parts of 'the issue'.

It might be

helpful if we can tell the difference, and figure out what might
influence the death rate.

Sadly, you aren't discovering anything of interest, and have
no intention of doing so. You examine a chart and extrapolate
while pretending that the underlying cause (a disease) is
a voodoo curse that obeys no familiar patterns or traditional
disease model.

It isn't inertia, it isn't 'a trend', it won't 'be over soon'. It was,
and is, a disease. We all know how to influence the death rate.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in news:c6cf7e12-ef0f-4f1c-
90e7-5bbc7544c5e5@googlegroups.com:

Will Australia isolate in the future for every flu or cold epidemic?

Probably not.

Which one of these is upside down?

<https://twitter.com/T__twitt/status/845386903344025605/photo/1>

Just thought you might like to escape for a few milliseconds.

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 09:15:00 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:56:20 AM UTC-4, with no apparent sense of irony, Bill Sloman wrote:

The US is doing a rotten job of slowing down the epidemic - and there's a whole lot of the country that doesn't seem to have enough people get sick to take the issue seriously.

Post of the day. Thanks!

Cheers,
James Arthur

Wow. We don't have enough sick people to make us take action to reduce
the huge number of sick people.

Another zinger.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Ricky C]

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:26:23 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 09:10:40 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:40:08 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 21/4/20 3:20 pm, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:01:45 +1000, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:
Even this years seasonal
influenza is killing more people than C19 but we didn't shut down the
economy in much worse flu years.

Not here, it's not. So far this April Australia has had only 99
influenza cases, compared to 18,000 for the same period last year.

Bit of a reduction, isn't it?

Isolation works.

18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. 6K (lab confirmed?)
corona cases so far this season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from? The numbers I quoted were
for the first *three weeks* of April (the start of our season).

6,645 cases, 71 deaths, 21-Apr-2020.

https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-infographic_18.pdf

We had 310,000 flu cases last season, and 900 deaths. That's bad, but
not even 1/3 the ratio of COVID19.

You can't just get away with making up numbers, not in this, and not in
electronics either.

So what's special about corona? Why didn't Australia isolate and
prevent those 18K cases last season?

Because (a) the number wasn't 18,0000 (b) it didn't kill proportionately
many people (c) we have a vaccine for it (d) people who recover almost
never have ongoing issues from it and (e) it didn't threaten to
imminently become 2,000,000 cases with at least 20,000 or more deaths.

At least make an attempt to get your facts straight. Numbers don't lie,
but you do.

CH

Cheers,
James Arthur

The population of Australia is about 25 million. 71 deaths, assigned
to this virus, is about 3 PPM.

New daily cases are way, way down according to jhu, under 80 a day
from a peak of 1300. Looks good.

It has the lopsided bell curve, steep raise and slower tail. Maybe
lockdowns do that.

Of course they do. If it weren't for the lockdowns the curves would continue exponentially... or are you still in denial about that?

The tails are long because the lockdown doesn't bring R0 as much below 1 as it is above 1 without the lockdown. In fact, in most of the US the R0 appears to be barely below 1 as shown by the number of new infections remaining constant.

Larkin checks a few locations in the US and elsewhere and finds curves he likes, then reports them as "lots" rather than as the exception. Essentially he lies about the data and convinces himself of the lie.

The new infection rate in the US is basically level and in the vast majority of counties in the US the new infection rate is level or increasing. I did find one area of the country where the new infection rate is pretty consistently dropping around New Orleans. The rates are still not low, but headed in the right direction. Then across Mississippi, Alabama and Georgia the numbers are not low and either increasing or climbing. Most of these counties have small hospitals and will become a new New York as the infection continues to spread involving a larger percentage of the population.

This is a great tool for examining the statistics of this disease at the county level. It is a little quirky and one line of the mouseover info is mislabeled as Daily New Confirmed Count per 10k Population when it is really Daily New Death Count per 10k Population. I'm surprised no one has informed them of the issue. Click on each county and you can see a graph of the various statistics over the course of this infection. The data presentation is invaluable for seeing what is happening across the country.

https://geodacenter.github.io/covid/map.html#

On the right hand side select Daily New Confirmed Count per 10k Population to see the hot spots. Then scan around clicking counties to see where the infection rate is climbing and where it is falling.

I just wish the numbers were going down day to day as Larkin wants to think they are. But they aren't. Not yet. It seems pretty clear people are NOT following the stay at home orders the way they did in China.

--

Rick C.

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

 

[Clifford Heath]

On 22/4/20 2:10 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:40:08 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 21/4/20 3:20 pm, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:01:45 +1000, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:
Even this years seasonal
influenza is killing more people than C19 but we didn't shut down the
economy in much worse flu years.

Not here, it's not. So far this April Australia has had only 99
influenza cases, compared to 18,000 for the same period last year.

Bit of a reduction, isn't it?

Isolation works.

18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. 6K (lab confirmed?)
corona cases so far this season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from? The numbers I quoted were
for the first *three weeks* of April (the start of our season).

6,645 cases, 71 deaths, 21-Apr-2020.

https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-infographic_18.pdf

We had 310,000 flu cases last season, and 900 deaths. That's bad, but
not even 1/3 the ratio of COVID19.

Hello, knock knock, is there anyone in there?

We're talking about the flu, not covid-19.

CH

 

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 6:48:29 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:

On 22/4/20 2:10 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:40:08 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 21/4/20 3:20 pm, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:01:45 +1000, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:
Even this years seasonal
influenza is killing more people than C19 but we didn't shut down the
economy in much worse flu years.

Not here, it's not. So far this April Australia has had only 99
influenza cases, compared to 18,000 for the same period last year.

Bit of a reduction, isn't it?

Isolation works.

18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. 6K (lab confirmed?)
corona cases so far this season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from? The numbers I quoted were
for the first *three weeks* of April (the start of our season).

6,645 cases, 71 deaths, 21-Apr-2020.

https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-infographic_18.pdf

We had 310,000 flu cases last season, and 900 deaths. That's bad, but
not even 1/3 the ratio of COVID19.

Hello, knock knock, is there anyone in there?

We're talking about the flu, not covid-19.

CH

<quote>

18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. _6K_ (lab confirmed?)
_CORONA_CASES_so_far_this_season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from?
/quote

"6k (lab confirmed?) Corona cases" == "talking about" covid-19

HTH

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Clifford Heath]

On 22/4/20 10:43 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 6:48:29 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 22/4/20 2:10 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:40:08 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 21/4/20 3:20 pm, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:01:45 +1000, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:
Even this years seasonal
influenza is killing more people than C19 but we didn't shut down the
economy in much worse flu years.

Not here, it's not. So far this April Australia has had only 99
influenza cases, compared to 18,000 for the same period last year.

Bit of a reduction, isn't it?

Isolation works.

18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. 6K (lab confirmed?)
corona cases so far this season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from? The numbers I quoted were
for the first *three weeks* of April (the start of our season).

6,645 cases, 71 deaths, 21-Apr-2020.

https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-infographic_18.pdf

We had 310,000 flu cases last season, and 900 deaths. That's bad, but
not even 1/3 the ratio of COVID19.

Hello, knock knock, is there anyone in there?

We're talking about the flu, not covid-19.

CH


quote
18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. _6K_ (lab confirmed?)
_CORONA_CASES_so_far_this_season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from?
/quote

"6k (lab confirmed?) Corona cases" == "talking about" covid-19

My words, to which JL responded, are still above:

"So far this April Australia has had only 99 influenza cases, compared
to 18,000 for the same period last year"

That was on the morning news yesterday. It flatly contradicts the claim
JL made in his previous message - about the *flu* - not covid19.

CH

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 at 4:24:16 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 11:05:56 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 4:21:56 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 22:46:18 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com
wrote:

Yes, exponential laws of decay of one variable are laws of growth of the
reciprocal variable. It's obvious.

If you stand on your head, it's obvious that up is down.

I gave your physics question has a valid answer, and your
standing on your head doesn't impress a virus. It doesn't
change what your GPS device thinks is 'down'.

The issue is, are more people dying or are fewer dying?

We know exactly how many people are dying. There are occasional uncertainties about exactly what killed them, but deaths do get noticed and documented.

It might be helpful if we can tell the difference, and figure out what might
influence the death rate.

You are more likely to die of Covid-19 if you are older, fatter or a smoker.

In the US you can boost your chances no end by living in or near New York.

You may have to wait a while before you get the same opportunity.

> So I think "more" and "less" have meaning here.

But your capacity for working out what that meaning might be is less than impressive.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 at 3:26:23 AM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 09:10:40 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:40:08 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 21/4/20 3:20 pm, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:01:45 +1000, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:
Even this years seasonal
influenza is killing more people than C19 but we didn't shut down the
economy in much worse flu years.

Not here, it's not. So far this April Australia has had only 99
influenza cases, compared to 18,000 for the same period last year.

Bit of a reduction, isn't it?

Isolation works.

18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. 6K (lab confirmed?)
corona cases so far this season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from? The numbers I quoted were
for the first *three weeks* of April (the start of our season).

6,645 cases, 71 deaths, 21-Apr-2020.

https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-infographic_18.pdf

We had 310,000 flu cases last season, and 900 deaths. That's bad, but
not even 1/3 the ratio of COVID19.

You can't just get away with making up numbers, not in this, and not in
electronics either.

So what's special about corona? Why didn't Australia isolate and
prevent those 18K cases last season?

Because (a) the number wasn't 18,0000 (b) it didn't kill proportionately
many people (c) we have a vaccine for it (d) people who recover almost
never have ongoing issues from it and (e) it didn't threaten to
imminently become 2,000,000 cases with at least 20,000 or more deaths.

At least make an attempt to get your facts straight. Numbers don't lie,
but you do.

The population of Australia is about 25 million. 71 deaths, assigned
to this virus, is about 3 PPM.

New daily cases are way, way down according to jhu, under 80 a day
from a peak of 1300. Looks good.

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

has the most recent three days at 26, 13 and 20.

It has the lopsided bell curve, steep raise and slower tail. Maybe
lock-downs do that.

A fairly enthusiastic and police enforced lock-down. Good contact tracing is probably more important. There are versions of that curve that separate new cases into foreign infected, known local infected and unknown-source. The last group is the smallest.

https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-current-situation-and-case-numbers

Doesn't really support your idea that most Covid-19 cases are asymptomatic and undetected. The antibody test results are preliminary, haven't been peer-reviewed and were collected by researchers who found what they wanted and expected.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 9:27:35 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:

On 22/4/20 10:43 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 6:48:29 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 22/4/20 2:10 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:40:08 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 21/4/20 3:20 pm, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:01:45 +1000, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:
Even this years seasonal
influenza is killing more people than C19 but we didn't shut down the
economy in much worse flu years.

Not here, it's not. So far this April Australia has had only 99
influenza cases, compared to 18,000 for the same period last year.

Bit of a reduction, isn't it?

Isolation works.

18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. 6K (lab confirmed?)
corona cases so far this season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from? The numbers I quoted were
for the first *three weeks* of April (the start of our season).

6,645 cases, 71 deaths, 21-Apr-2020.

https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-infographic_18.pdf

We had 310,000 flu cases last season, and 900 deaths. That's bad, but
not even 1/3 the ratio of COVID19.

Hello, knock knock, is there anyone in there?

We're talking about the flu, not covid-19.

CH


quote
18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. _6K_ (lab confirmed?)
_CORONA_CASES_so_far_this_season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from?
/quote

"6k (lab confirmed?) Corona cases" == "talking about" covid-19

My words, to which JL responded, are still above:

"So far this April Australia has had only 99 influenza cases, compared
to 18,000 for the same period last year"

That was on the morning news yesterday. It flatly contradicts the claim
JL made in his previous message - about the *flu* - not covid19.

CH

I understand that. But John stated two figures, you asked where he
got them, so I supplied backup for one of the two figures.

One out of two, for free, isn't bad.

I don't find the flu question particularly interesting -- it's obvious
that everyone hiding will at least delay infections, possibly until
the next favorable propagation season.

But we don't do that. We don't all hide every year, avoiding the flu.

If anything, the lofty question of 'quarantine's flu-spread suppressing
efficacy' highlights the fact that we don't find it necessary to stop
the world and hide annually from the flu, despite flu being approximately
as deadly as China's Gift.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Clifford Heath]

On 22/4/20 4:24 pm, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 9:27:35 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
My words, to which JL responded, are still above:

"So far this April Australia has had only 99 influenza cases, compared
to 18,000 for the same period last year"

That was on the morning news yesterday. It flatly contradicts the claim
JL made in his previous message - about the *flu* - not covid19.
I understand that. But John stated two figures, you asked where he
got them, so I supplied backup for one of the two figures.

Oh I see. You also understood that JL was prevaricating (as usual) but
didn't see the need to call him out on that. No worries, I understand.

> I don't find the flu question particularly interesting

Neither do I, but JL seems to think that "this is like that" when it
clearly isn't.

> But we don't do that. We don't all hide every year, avoiding the flu.

Because (a) we expect to recover from it and (b) we expect to get
intensive care if we do get it badly and (c) we have a vaccine if we're
still worried enough about it.

We need to know why 20% of hospital cases progress to the
intensive-care, and others just get better. That's not just about
co-morbidities and age, but we don't know what it is. As it is, it's
like the boogie-man - it engenders extreme fear because it's unknown.

If anything, the lofty question of 'quarantine's flu-spread suppressing
efficacy' highlights the fact that we don't find it necessary to stop
the world and hide annually from the flu, despite flu being approximately
as deadly as China's Gift.

I believe your evaluation is wrong. It seems likely to me that covid19
is much worse. The few places where it is not severe have sufficient
educational and health standards that folk quickly took steps to protect
themselves, regardless of any lock-down orders. I certainly did.

In addition, I think this experience will make a lot more people
maintain reduced flu risk in subsequent years, by learned hygiene
behaviour. In other words, a lot of people will "hide annually from the
flu" even if covid19 is not an ongoing risk.

"Gift" huh. That's the German word for "poison"...

One good thing that might come of this is that we'll know a lot more
about corona viruses, and might even be able to vaccinate against the
common cold as a result. That would be nice.

Clifford Heath

 

[Martin Brown]

On 22/04/2020 08:49, Clifford Heath wrote:

One good thing that might come of this is that we'll know a lot more
about corona viruses, and might even be able to vaccinate against the
common cold as a result. That would be nice.

The flip side of that is coronaviruses represent only 15% or so of the
common colds - the bulk of them being rhinoviruses. I suspect they will
prove just slightly too volatile to be vaccinated against effectively.

Common cold forms appear to mutate just fast enough that once pandoras
box has been opened they evade our existing immune responses.

It could well be that the novel coronavirus is no better at making
perfect copies of itself than its cousins and so genetic drift will
invalidate any acquired immunity over a period of 1-5 years.

Highly isolated communities like British Antarctic Survey are resigned
to having the seasonal global colds and flu all together when their
first supply ship or flight arrives after the winter lock down.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 at 4:24:52 PM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 9:27:35 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 22/4/20 10:43 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 6:48:29 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 22/4/20 2:10 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:40:08 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 21/4/20 3:20 pm, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:01:45 +1000, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:

I don't find the flu question particularly interesting -- it's obvious
that everyone hiding will at least delay infections, possibly until
the next favorable propagation season.

But we don't do that. We don't all hide every year, avoiding the flu.

If anything, the lofty question of 'quarantine's flu-spread suppressing
efficacy' highlights the fact that we don't find it necessary to stop
the world and hide annually from the flu, despite flu being approximately
as deadly as China's Gift.

Your calculation of it's lethality is uniquely yours, and entirely based on uncritical acceptance of two small antibody studies in California which haven't even been peer-reviewed yet, and find many more asymptomatic (and never confirmed) cases of Covid-19 than contact tracing results suggest.

My feeling is that they antibody test was flawed, and your conclusions about it lethality are irresponsibly optimistic.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 23:24:45 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 9:27:35 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 22/4/20 10:43 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 6:48:29 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 22/4/20 2:10 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:40:08 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 21/4/20 3:20 pm, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:01:45 +1000, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:
Even this years seasonal
influenza is killing more people than C19 but we didn't shut down the
economy in much worse flu years.

Not here, it's not. So far this April Australia has had only 99
influenza cases, compared to 18,000 for the same period last year.

Bit of a reduction, isn't it?

Isolation works.

18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. 6K (lab confirmed?)
corona cases so far this season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from? The numbers I quoted were
for the first *three weeks* of April (the start of our season).

6,645 cases, 71 deaths, 21-Apr-2020.

https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/04/coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-coronavirus-covid-19-at-a-glance-infographic_18.pdf

We had 310,000 flu cases last season, and 900 deaths. That's bad, but
not even 1/3 the ratio of COVID19.

Hello, knock knock, is there anyone in there?

We're talking about the flu, not covid-19.

CH


quote
18K laboratory confirmed flu cases last season. _6K_ (lab confirmed?)
_CORONA_CASES_so_far_this_season.

Whose arse did you pull those numbers from?
/quote

"6k (lab confirmed?) Corona cases" == "talking about" covid-19

My words, to which JL responded, are still above:

"So far this April Australia has had only 99 influenza cases, compared
to 18,000 for the same period last year"

That was on the morning news yesterday. It flatly contradicts the claim
JL made in his previous message - about the *flu* - not covid19.

CH

I understand that. But John stated two figures, you asked where he
got them, so I supplied backup for one of the two figures.

One out of two, for free, isn't bad.

I don't find the flu question particularly interesting -- it's obvious
that everyone hiding will at least delay infections, possibly until
the next favorable propagation season.

But we don't do that. We don't all hide every year, avoiding the flu.

Exactly. My question was and is, why don't we lock down for colds and
flu every winter? Or all the time for safety margin? Why did we pick
C19 to panic over? (Actually, I know why.)

Nobody wants to discuss that. They just yell "But people are dying!!!"

If anything, the lofty question of 'quarantine's flu-spread suppressing
efficacy' highlights the fact that we don't find it necessary to stop
the world and hide annually from the flu, despite flu being approximately
as deadly as China's Gift.

Cheers,
James Arthur

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[Martin Brown]

On 22/04/2020 11:19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 23:24:45 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

I don't find the flu question particularly interesting -- it's obvious
that everyone hiding will at least delay infections, possibly until
the next favorable propagation season.

But we don't do that. We don't all hide every year, avoiding the flu.

Exactly. My question was and is, why don't we lock down for colds and
flu every winter? Or all the time for safety margin? Why did we pick
C19 to panic over? (Actually, I know why.)

Nobody wants to discuss that. They just yell "But people are dying!!!"

There is a couple of orders of magnitude difference between the average
damage that flu does to an individual and to health systems. Young fit
medics in the front line are amongst the people dying who should not be.

UK has been somewhat cavalier about obtaining PPE for frontline workers.

Covid-19 is more or less perfect as a pandemic virus. It will if left to
run through the population unchecked kill about as many people as WWI or
WWII depending on the whose models you believe. It has got into UK care
homes and the deaths there have risen at an alarming rate recently.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52341403

This paper by a Professor of risk management at the university of
Bristol and inexplicably published in an obscure journal of
Nanotechnology puts the economic case for taking more risk with lives
now to avoid invisibly killing many more people in the longer term.

It is a quite subtle arguement and I wonder about the modelling skills
of someone who cannot reliably fit an exponential to a dataset (see his
fig 1). It is clear that the doubling time is approx 3 days elapsed.
(and that the data points *can* be fitted with an exponential)

http://jvalue.co.uk/papers/J-value-assessment-of-combating-Covid-19.pdf

The crux of his argument is that concentrating so much on Covid-19 risks
collateral damage in cancer, heart, stroke and sepsis cases now and
damage to the health service in the longer term from the economic slump
that lockdown will inevitably provoke. I think he has a valid point.
(even though I disagree with some details in his model)

I know that the Royal Society is also working on an independent cross
discipline numerical model of the pandemic scenarios.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 11:47:46 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

On 22/04/2020 11:19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 23:24:45 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

I don't find the flu question particularly interesting -- it's obvious
that everyone hiding will at least delay infections, possibly until
the next favorable propagation season.

But we don't do that. We don't all hide every year, avoiding the flu.

Exactly. My question was and is, why don't we lock down for colds and
flu every winter? Or all the time for safety margin? Why did we pick
C19 to panic over? (Actually, I know why.)

Nobody wants to discuss that. They just yell "But people are dying!!!"

There is a couple of orders of magnitude difference between the average
damage that flu does to an individual and to health systems. Young fit
medics in the front line are amongst the people dying who should not be.

UK has been somewhat cavalier about obtaining PPE for frontline workers.

Covid-19 is more or less perfect as a pandemic virus. It will if left to
run through the population unchecked kill about as many people as WWI or
WWII depending on the whose models you believe. It has got into UK care
homes and the deaths there have risen at an alarming rate recently.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52341403

This paper by a Professor of risk management at the university of
Bristol and inexplicably published in an obscure journal of
Nanotechnology puts the economic case for taking more risk with lives
now to avoid invisibly killing many more people in the longer term.

It is a quite subtle arguement and I wonder about the modelling skills
of someone who cannot reliably fit an exponential to a dataset (see his
fig 1). It is clear that the doubling time is approx 3 days elapsed.
(and that the data points *can* be fitted with an exponential)

http://jvalue.co.uk/papers/J-value-assessment-of-combating-Covid-19.pdf

The crux of his argument is that concentrating so much on Covid-19 risks
collateral damage in cancer, heart, stroke and sepsis cases now and
damage to the health service in the longer term from the economic slump
that lockdown will inevitably provoke. I think he has a valid point.
(even though I disagree with some details in his model)

I know that the Royal Society is also working on an independent cross
discipline numerical model of the pandemic scenarios.

In the US, the median lifetime of a senior in a nursing home is about
6 months. People go there to die.

Take a look at this:

https://www.fox5ny.com/news/brooklyn-care-home-has-55-dead


"Not a single resident has been able to get tested for the virus to
this day."

"Now listed with 55 deaths it can only assume were caused by COVID-19"





--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 at 8:19:23 PM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 23:24:45 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 9:27:35 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 22/4/20 10:43 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 6:48:29 PM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 22/4/20 2:10 am, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 1:40:08 AM UTC-4, Clifford Heath wrote:
On 21/4/20 3:20 pm, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:01:45 +1000, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:

<snip>

But we don't do that. We don't all hide every year, avoiding the flu.

Exactly. My question was and is, why don't we lock down for colds and
flu every winter? Or all the time for safety margin? Why did we pick
C19 to panic over? (Actually, I know why.)

Nobody wants to discuss that. They just yell "But people are dying!!!"

Nobody wants to discuss it with you because you don't pay any attention to the answers. Most of us suspect that this is because you don't understand them.

If anything, the lofty question of 'quarantine's flu-spread suppressing
efficacy' highlights the fact that we don't find it necessary to stop
the world and hide annually from the flu, despite flu being approximately
as deadly as China's Gift.

Except that is Covid-19 is lot more deadly than seasonal flu, even if James Arthur wastes our time concocting spurious arguments claiming that it isn't.

It's a pity he can't be translated to New York to get a short - and hopefully fatal - education on the difference between rhetoric and reality.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 22/04/20 12:39, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 11:47:46 +0100, Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

On 22/04/2020 11:19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 23:24:45 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

I don't find the flu question particularly interesting -- it's obvious
that everyone hiding will at least delay infections, possibly until
the next favorable propagation season.

But we don't do that. We don't all hide every year, avoiding the flu.

Exactly. My question was and is, why don't we lock down for colds and
flu every winter? Or all the time for safety margin? Why did we pick
C19 to panic over? (Actually, I know why.)

Nobody wants to discuss that. They just yell "But people are dying!!!"

There is a couple of orders of magnitude difference between the average
damage that flu does to an individual and to health systems. Young fit
medics in the front line are amongst the people dying who should not be.

UK has been somewhat cavalier about obtaining PPE for frontline workers.

Covid-19 is more or less perfect as a pandemic virus. It will if left to
run through the population unchecked kill about as many people as WWI or
WWII depending on the whose models you believe. It has got into UK care
homes and the deaths there have risen at an alarming rate recently.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52341403

This paper by a Professor of risk management at the university of
Bristol and inexplicably published in an obscure journal of
Nanotechnology puts the economic case for taking more risk with lives
now to avoid invisibly killing many more people in the longer term.

It is a quite subtle arguement and I wonder about the modelling skills
of someone who cannot reliably fit an exponential to a dataset (see his
fig 1). It is clear that the doubling time is approx 3 days elapsed.
(and that the data points *can* be fitted with an exponential)

http://jvalue.co.uk/papers/J-value-assessment-of-combating-Covid-19.pdf

The crux of his argument is that concentrating so much on Covid-19 risks
collateral damage in cancer, heart, stroke and sepsis cases now and
damage to the health service in the longer term from the economic slump
that lockdown will inevitably provoke. I think he has a valid point.
(even though I disagree with some details in his model)

I know that the Royal Society is also working on an independent cross
discipline numerical model of the pandemic scenarios.


In the US, the median lifetime of a senior in a nursing home is about
6 months. People go there to die.

I know of one person who improved in a nursing home,
because they were getting decent physiotherapy.

But there's always an example that breaks the rule.

Take a look at this:

https://www.fox5ny.com/news/brooklyn-care-home-has-55-dead


"Not a single resident has been able to get tested for the virus to
this day."

"Now listed with 55 deaths it can only assume were caused by COVID-19"

As an example of how the stats in the UK are deficient,
it is now becoming apparent that the death rate has been
grossly under-reported (by a factor of *two*) for a number
of reasons.

Principal reasons are
- delays of up to a week collating death reports from
outside hospitals
- GP reluctance to put covid on the death certificate
unless that is unequivocally the cause

The best available statistic is the excess mortality
over what would be expected - and that is *very* noticeable.
See the graph
https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/https%3A%2F%2Fd6c748xw2pzm8.cloudfront.net%2Fprod%2Fb82c6ec0-83f4-11ea-8d9b-3ddaa1e421ff-standard.png?fit=scale-down&quality=highest&source=next&width=700
from article
https://www.ft.com/content/67e6a4ee-3d05-43bc-ba03-e239799fa6ab

Note my long-time favourite risk statistician, Spiegelhalter,
is quoted.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 22/04/20 12:13, Bill Sloman wrote:
> Except that is Covid-19 is lot more deadly than seasonal flu,

That's rather well demonstrated by this graph, which
shows weekly deaths over the past 50 years (i.e.
including flu deaths), plus the rather stark graph
for this year.

https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/https%3A%2F%2Fd6c748xw2pzm8.cloudfront.net%2Fprod%2Fb82c6ec0-83f4-11ea-8d9b-3ddaa1e421ff-standard.png?fit=scale-down&quality=highest&source=next&width=700