Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[mission27]

19 minutes ago, Glen said:

Italy has a population density of 532 per square mile.

New York has a population density of 416.

Italys per capita rate is 376 per million you mentioned(I’ll take your word on that)

New York’s is 700(Ish) if my math is right.

Granted New York has been hit the hardest. As well as having on of the densest populations in the world in NYC.

But I’m just trying to see if you’re looking at all the facts & making sure you think through every avenue before making your mole list

Sure but you're also comparing the hardest hit metro area in the US and close to the hardest hit metro in the world to the entire country of Italy, many parts of Italy were not hit very hard just like many areas in the US were not hit very hard 

I think if you compared Lombardy to NYC area that would be more valid comparison 

Anyway, Spain and Italy peaked in deaths about two weeks ago.  US deaths imo are at their peak right about now (I think some of the tick up the last few days is reclassifying and given the trend in hospitalizations, etc. I do not think it will continue to rise significantly).  Even if you had 3k deaths a day on average for the next two weeks, which would be very surprising given the stabilization and fall in hospitalizations, the US still would be around 220 deaths per million, or about half where Spain and 60% of where Italy are at that point on the timeline / curve

It would be very surprising to me if the US came anywhere near the death rate per capita of Italy, Spain, or the other hard hit areas of Europe at least for wave 1 tbh

If we're just talking about the tristate area, its a different story, btw.  US death rate is a lot lower right now because there are large parts of the country that have so far avoided major breakouts

[N4L]

5 hours ago, theJ said:

Anyone notice how everyone says we're getting through this together, but we're actually getting through it apart?

#togetheralone

[Hunter2_1]

9 hours ago, dtait93 said:

Can’t hold us down baby 

Advice might not be able to, but this would;

[mistakey]

7 hours ago, vikesfan89 said:

Has anyone looked at how Sweden is doing it? They haven't done as much of a lockdown. They still have a fair number cases but it also hasn't exploded

Uh they have significantly higher growth rate in cases compared to their scandanavian neighbors + poland and denmark

[Glen]

5 hours ago, mission27 said:

Sure but you're also comparing the hardest hit metro area in the US and close to the hardest hit metro in the world to the entire country of Italy, many parts of Italy were not hit very hard just like many areas in the US were not hit very hard 

I think if you compared Lombardy to NYC area that would be more valid comparison 

Anyway, Spain and Italy peaked in deaths about two weeks ago.  US deaths imo are at their peak right about now (I think some of the tick up the last few days is reclassifying and given the trend in hospitalizations, etc. I do not think it will continue to rise significantly).  Even if you had 3k deaths a day on average for the next two weeks, which would be very surprising given the stabilization and fall in hospitalizations, the US still would be around 220 deaths per million, or about half where Spain and 60% of where Italy are at that point on the timeline / curve

It would be very surprising to me if the US came anywhere near the death rate per capita of Italy, Spain, or the other hard hit areas of Europe at least for wave 1 tbh

If we're just talking about the tristate area, its a different story, btw.  US death rate is a lot lower right now because there are large parts of the country that have so far avoided major breakouts

There are many layers to this post as well.. but.

I believe you are comparing Italy to to NY state as well. If not directly, but indirectly. You say you believe we're at our peak(due to our largest area likely hitting their peak) but states like OK, AR, NB, IA, and SD(None of whom have stay-home orders iirc) are rapidly rising in cases.

You say our death rate is a lot lower due to the part that some parts of the country have so far avoided major breakouts. But also say we're at our peak right now.

To me that sounds like you're just assuming those areas will not be hit at all. And given how we've seen every area in the world slowly get hit over time. I don't understand how you could come to that conclusion.

[dtait93]

6 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Advice might not be able to, but this would;

FL =\= Italy especially since we know the heat and humidity greatly combat the virus

[naptownskinsfan]

2 hours ago, Glen said:

There are many layers to this post as well.. but.

I believe you are comparing Italy to to NY state as well. If not directly, but indirectly. You say you believe we're at our peak(due to our largest area likely hitting their peak) but states like OK, AR, NB, IA, and SD(None of whom have stay-home orders iirc) are rapidly rising in cases.

You say our death rate is a lot lower due to the part that some parts of the country have so far avoided major breakouts. But also say we're at our peak right now.

To me that sounds like you're just assuming those areas will not be hit at all. And given how we've seen every area in the world slowly get hit over time. I don't understand how you could come to that conclusion.

I thought everyone was at a stay at home order at this point.  South Dakota might be the only exception.  

I'm worried with the interior of the country having their peak now that we might relax things on the coasts and we get a rebound off of this. 

[mission27]

3 hours ago, Glen said:

There are many layers to this post as well.. but.

I believe you are comparing Italy to to NY state as well. If not directly, but indirectly. You say you believe we're at our peak(due to our largest area likely hitting their peak) but states like OK, AR, NB, IA, and SD(None of whom have stay-home orders iirc) are rapidly rising in cases.

You say our death rate is a lot lower due to the part that some parts of the country have so far avoided major breakouts. But also say we're at our peak right now.

To me that sounds like you're just assuming those areas will not be hit at all. And given how we've seen every area in the world slowly get hit over time. I don't understand how you could come to that conclusion.

Everything we know about this disease says it is at its most dangerous in large metros

I'd be much more worried about a New York style outbreak in Chicago or Philadelphia than about cases in places like Oklahoma tbh

[mission27]

Also idk if people are not looking at the data correctly or being imprecise about what 'rising cases' means but for example if you look at Oklahoma, the pattern is very similar to everywhere else... 

Even South Dakota looks like it may have peaked in the last week or so.  At the very least I'd say the last week of data indicates its leveling off...

I dont see any part of the country right now where R0 isn't fall and the shape of the curve isn't encouraging, which is what our public health officials are telling us. That doesn't mean this is going to go away. But we are clearly at the peak of this wave, if not on the other side of it. If we were seeing 3k-4k deaths a day in a week I would honestly be shocked.

[mission27]

This is what we should expect the graph of new cases to look like for any given geographical outbreak

You have a big spike of new cases when you start testing and R0 is through the roof then you have a long period of lowering R0 and getting this under control 

The spike period may be 2-3 weeks, the tail could be 2 months, after the two months you shouldn't expect 0 new cases but you will down to a much lower number.  With proper public health controls in place you can probably stay at that number.  Without those controls, you'd obviously see another spike

I don't see any part of the country that doesn't seem to be at or past the peak for the initial wave of cases.  That doesnt mean there can't be a new cluster of cases in a large metro like Chicago that gets out of control once we start to ease restrictions that puts them on a new trajectory.  But thats a risk in any country right now

[TVScout]

14 hours ago, pwny said:

I fixed that chart to actually say what has been reported.

How does non cv19 mortality increase 20% in one year?

[Glen]

2 minutes ago, TVScout said:

How does non cv19 mortality increase 20% in one year?

more people die in that year than the year before.

20% to be precise

[mission27]

2 minutes ago, TVScout said:

How does non cv19 mortality increase 20% in one year?

Its probably the 'tremendous suicides' we were warned about 

(im kidding)

[WizeGuy]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/18/coronavirus-vaccine-trials-could-be-completed-by-mid-august

 

Damn, a if everything goes right Oxford could have a vaccine approved by August. Mass producing it will be tough, but there's no doubt a lot of wealthy people will want to invest in the production. 

 

Normally I'd call bull****, but this is a trial coming out of Oxford, so at least it's a reputable school. The article states we should know by mid-to-late May if this vaccine will be effective. 

[mission27]

28 minutes ago, WizeGuy said:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/18/coronavirus-vaccine-trials-could-be-completed-by-mid-august

 

Damn, a if everything goes right Oxford could have a vaccine approved by August. Mass producing it will be tough, but there's no doubt a lot of wealthy people will want to invest in the production. 

 

Normally I'd call bull****, but this is a trial coming out of Oxford, so at least it's a reputable school. The article states we should know by mid-to-late May if this vaccine will be effective. 

I dont think money is going to be an issue here