But the risk is with the young ones working in healthcare with improper protection that get a high first dose. The same for the poor ones, living in one room all together with a sick daddy. In the US 2-3 times more black people are affected in relation to total population.
"in one room all together with a sick daddy"
but that seems a false argument. 53% of blacks live without a father in the home and 24% of whites live without a father in the home.
It must be some other factor.
We in the UK are definitely the 'control' group in Europe with case numbers and daily death numbers remaining stable over the last three weeks whereas Italy, Spain and Germany whose doctors are now routinely prescribing HCQ and Avigan are showing definite falls over the same period. This is depressing.
Most people go by the earlier 0.66% projection (a month ago). There was still room to hope it might be 50% of that (as in the German Ho study). This figure is not conclusive, but it is bad news not good news.
The initial fear was 2.2 million US deaths. Forget the CFR/IFR, and just think projected deaths for the moment. The media jumped on that shocking number, and used it to spook politicians into taking the actions they did. The projected deaths were then revised downwards to 100-240,000. and stand today at 66,000. In addition, many in the media, and some here, freely mixed the first CFR out Wuhan of 3.4%, as if 3.4% of the worlds population would die, I still see these huge numbers thrown around.
Yes, the first solid IFR of .66%, was heartening, but it was heavily resisted though by the fear mongers. That was too close to a bad flu season to fit their pants on fire narrative.
That aside, the numbers IMO are looking much more promising. They show the virus is deadly, warranting the kind of social distancing already employed so as not to overwhelm the health care system (except in Georgia where they are always overwhelmed because they are no better off than during the confederacy), and that now since we understand the enemy much better, we can get back to normal.
We have found that some exposed to the virus do not develop any antibodies. A publication is on the way. These persons are asymptomatic or weakly symptomatic. Many children in this group. Probably the innate immune system that provides a natural barrier against the virus. We don't know how many though. And don't know yet how to estimate this number, this is complex. Any idea? What is sure is that this group has a non-negligible size and that in turn the IFR is lower than most believe.
https://www.vox.com/2020/4/23/…timulus-package-house-wfp
These are shocking numbers. 5 weeks ago no one was predicting:
"More than 4.4 million people filed jobless claims the week ending April 18. That brings the total to 26 million over the five-week period during which many businesses have remained shut. The staggering numbers could add some fuel to the movement to start reopening economies, even though the coronavirus crisis has not abated."
And that:
"Add the global economic crisis and the situation is even more dire for low- and middle-income countries. For example, global remittances — money sent from people working overseas back home — are expected to dip more than 20 percent this year, from $714 billion to $572 billion, according to the World Bank. That wipes out billions of dollars that make up a significant chunk of many countries’ economies.
Taken together, these economic realities are exacerbating another problem: hunger. The UN’s World Food Program is estimating that the number of people facing starvation in 2020 could double, to 265 million."
The initial fear was 2.2 million US deaths. Forget the CFR/IFR, and just think projected deaths for the moment. The media jumped on that shocking number, and used it to spook politicians into taking the actions they did. The projected deaths were then revised downwards to 100-240,000. and stand today at 66,000. In addition, many in the media, and some here, freely mixed the first CFR out Wuhan of 3.4%, as if 3.4% of the worlds population would die, I still see these huge numbers thrown around.
Yes, the first solid IFR of .66%, was heartening, but it was heavily resisted though by the fear mongers. That was too close to a bad flu season to fit their pants on fire narrative.
That aside, the numbers IMO are looking much more promising. They show the virus is deadly, warranting the kind of social distancing already employed so as not to overwhelm the health care system (except in Georgia where they are always overwhelmed because they are no better off than during the confederacy), and that now since we understand the enemy much better, we can get back to normal.
Shane: the US has been locked down. Don't you think 2.2M is reasonable if not locked down.
We have 0.78% IFR from NY - which is one of the healthiest states. Let us round up to 1% taking into account all those Southern unhealthy ones. That would be 3.2M. But the virus will not persist when it gets to high percentage of population so take say 75% infected, in a non-locked-down world: 1.9M.
Given the great uncertainty in IFR (when that projection was made) that is close. No?
You can get back to normal now only if you social distance enough to keep R0 < 1. Which you can only check in time with massive population testing. Not sure if US is going for this - I'd hope so. In cities, certainly, normal R0 < 1 is not very normal! Even in areas of low population social distancing everywhere, even at work, means dramatic changes.
Why is this a bit depressing? To me it means that the virus is not so deadly as first thought.
Yes, it may mean that. That depends on how many people died unaccounted for in New York. That is a large number, but it has not been pinned down. It includes people who were never tested after they died at home, and some who were not tested after they died in the hospital. In the month ending April 4, there were 3,350 confirmed coronavirus deaths in New York City, and 5,330 more deaths than a normal year. There were fewer car accidents and industrial accidents. This suggests that most of the excess 5,330 deaths were from coronavirus, which means they undercounted by ~1,980. In other words, the number of dead was ~159% of the official count. The difference is probably smaller now, because there is more testing. Even at that, the estimate of 15,500 is probably off by ~50%. It should be ~23,000. If there have actually been 2,700,000 cases, as estimated from the antibody tests, that works out to be ~1% mortality. That is overall mortality for all age groups. That's a lot better than ~2%.
The initial fear was 2.2 million US deaths. Forget the CFR/IFR, and just think projected deaths for the moment. The media jumped on that shocking number, and used it to spook politicians into taking the actions they did. The projected deaths were then revised downwards to 100-240,000. and stand today at 66,000. I
The projected deaths were only revised down because the lockdown worked. That is undeniable. No other parameter had changed. There is no monitoring or quarantining. The increase in infections was doubling every 3 days, and it fell to remaining steady at ~30,000 cases per day. In other words, each patient now infects ~1 other person before recovering. Not 1.3 per day. If there had been no lockdown, we would have hundreds of thousands of new cases a day. That is how every uncontrolled, natural epidemic works, whether with flocks of birds or people. That is a fact of nature. It is absolutely certain that would have happened if we had not taken steps to reduce the infection rate.
Suppose the infections continue at this rate, or it increases, until 60% of the population has been infected, giving us herd immunity. At that point, the epidemic will peak and then fall. Again, that is what all epidemics do in nature. In that case, whether it happens slowly or quickly, there will definitely be 2 to 4 million deaths. 60% of the population is 200 million. 1% of that is 2 million. The mortality rate may be 1% instead of 2%, but it sure as hell is not 0.1% or less. The best medical science on earth, as practiced today in Korea and Japan, cannot reduce the mortality rate below 1%.
In Georgia, if people go back to movies and church services, as the governor wants, we will soon see the infection rate jump above ~1. You will once again see what an exponential increase looks like. I do not think it will be 1.3 times per day, but I expect it will be enough to clobber the economy and force the state to return to a complete lockdown within weeks. It will defeat the purpose, which is to revive the economy. It will have the opposite effect. I do not see how else this can end. There is virtually no testing in Georgia. It would take years to test the whole population. People are still dying without being tested. The governor mentioned monitoring, but there are no actual plans to do it, as far as I know. (Nothing has been reported in the local news.) So, we will reset the situation back to where it was in mid-March. Since human biology has not changed, and the control parameters will be the same, the infection rate must return to what it was, subject only to limits by sensible people who stay away from bowling alleys, churches, etc.
Doubt it. They count every death with a positive PCR test as a Covid death. Stage 4 cancer death + test -> Covid death. There are whistleblowers talking about this but hard to find. [most of you are scared to death on here because of fraudlent excel data - would you speak out if you could be fired because of it! No.]. I can't verify this guy, but he indicates in his facility any respiratory failure was Covid. Heart failure + Breathing problems -> Covid.
People die folks. Manipulation is rampant.
Come on Navid.
"Stage 4 cancer death + test -> Covid death."
Yes this is perfectly legitimate.
If you shoot in the head a man with stage 4 cancer it is homicide and you get a death sentence (life sentence in civilized countries).
If you drive with a passenger who has stage 4 cancer and you smash your car into a wall you both count equally as a road accident death.
The few years or months of life expectancy left to a person with stage 4 cancer matter to them and their loved ones.
Shane: the US has been locked down. Don't you think 2.2M is reasonable if not locked down.
We have 0.78% IFR from NY - which is one of the healthiest states. Let us round up to 1% taking into account all those Southern unhealthy ones. That would be 3.2M. But the virus will not persist when it gets to high percentage of population so take say 75% infected, in a non-locked-down world: 1.9M.
Given the great uncertainty in IFR (when that projection was made) that is close. No?
Rounding up to 1% is close enough for government work. 
The 2.2 million is much more difficult to determine. Water under the bridge at this point, but social distancing no doubt slowed the doubling rate enough to where we could ensure the hospitals could handle the load.
There are many ways to accomplish social distancing however, and that is where it gets murky. Sweden has one way, some US states another, and many like NY, and here in Florida went all in. Would a lesser measure have worked as well? No telling, but in Trumps, and the Governors shoes, I would have assumed the worse case scenario being given, and chose the more severe policies.
As you have mentioned, the people will have changed their habits. Possibly for generations to come. They will be much more leery of hygiene, and that will in some way be like a continuous social distancing built into our society. Will that be enough so that as we start getting back to normal, it will suffice to stave off any renewed doubling? Not sure, but with the bad economic numbers growing worse by the day, I think we have to give it a try.
As THH said (?), once this is settled we will have learned a valuable lesson in how to handle the next pandemic. Maybe a much more lethal one than this, and be better prepared. This one, for all the prior, so called planning, no developed country was ready. Next time, leaders be able to react with the appropriate measure, for the level of threat.
From 'Nature' magazine...
| Alyson Kelvin in her containment lab. (Danny Abriel) |
Autopsy results change US timelineThe first COVID-19 death in the United States might have occurred in California on 6 February — more than three weeks before the first reported death in Washington state. Three deaths in Santa Clara County between 6 February and 6 March have now been attributed to COVID-19 after autopsies. Similar reports have surfaced elsewhere in recent weeks, including Italy. (Nature | continuously updated)US vaccine chief in bitter row over hydroxychloroquine Senior US-government official Rick Bright says he was abruptly ousted as the chief of the agency in charge of coronavirus-vaccine development because he did not support unproven treatments promoted by US President Donald Trump. “I believe this transfer was in response to my insistence that the government invest the billions of dollars allocated by Congress to address the Covid-19 pandemic into safe and scientifically vetted solutions, and not in drugs, vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit,” said Bright in a statement. Following his resignation, unnamed colleagues in the agency have criticized Bright for his leadership style, and for the strategy and pace of decision-making in his department. (Politico | 7 min read) |
"Add the global economic crisis and the situation is even more dire for low- and middle-income countries. For example, global remittances — money sent from people working overseas back home — are expected to dip more than 20 percent this year, from $714 billion to $572 billion, according to the World Bank. That wipes out billions of dollars that make up a significant chunk of many countries’ economies.
Taken together, these economic realities are exacerbating another problem: hunger. The UN’s World Food Program is estimating that the number of people facing starvation in 2020 could double, to 265 million."
No doubt that is true, but it is an artificial crisis. It is a crisis of our own making, caused by stupidity. We could fix it instantly, at no long term cost to anyone. All we have to do is give these people food now, and have them pay for it later.
Here's the situation in the U.S. We have warehouses full of food that will soon rot and go to waste. We have dairy farmers pouring out milk, because they cannot sell it. We will soon have fields full of rotting vegetables. Why? Because people cannot afford to buy the food. Since the U.S. government can borrow money at negative rates, it stands to reason that it could make a ton of money by distributing this food to Americans in need today, and after the epidemic ends by taxing them. If the government does not do that, those people will not be paying taxes after the epidemic ends. Their lives will be ruined, and they will be living in tents, just as people did in the Great Depression. It will take years or decades to recover, instead of a few months. This is not charity; it is common sense.
In the third world, we can augment their food supplies enough to avoid catastrophe, and after the epidemic ends, they can gradually pay us back with trade.
The coronavirus pandemic is caused by nature. All of the additional problems triggered by the pandemic that you list above are caused by idiots. All of these problems could easily be eliminated. It would not cost anything to eliminate them. On the contrary, it would be profitable, like building a railroad or launching GPS satellites.
Rounding up to 1% is close enough for government work. The 2.2 million is much more difficult to determine. Water under the bridge at this point,
No it is not water under the bridge. It is what must happen -- what will happen -- if you and the governor of Georgia have your way, and we re-open the nation without adequate testing and monitoring. In that case, the epidemic will once again resume an exponential increase. ~60% of the population will probably be infected before a vaccine becomes available, and ~2 million people will die. Actually, more like ~4 million.
If you want to advocate hiring 300,000 people to monitor the situation, quarantining, and waiting until there are only about ~100,000 sick people to infect the rest of us, then you agree with the experts, and with me, and we are all on the same page. If you advocate opening without these things, then you are in favor of wantonly destroying the economy and leaving ~20% of the population unemployed and living in tents, probably for years, as happened during the Great Depression.
Will that be enough so that is we started getting back tomorrow, it will suffice to stave off any renewed doubling? Not sure . . .
I am 100% sure you are wrong. Look what happened in Italy when they did not take the lockdown seriously. Look what happened in Paris, New York and Wuhan before the lockdown. What on earth makes you think the outcome will be any different?!? What parameter has changed? None!
Things will go right back to where they were in mid-March. UNLESS there is extensive testing and monitoring. At present testing rates, it would take years to test the whole population. You have to test some people several times a year, such as policemen and grocery store checkout clerks. At present there are no plans to monitor cases in most states. Massachusetts, Maryland and probably soon New York, California and other wealthy states will have monitoring, but there are no plans in Georgia and most other states as far as I know. Georgia cannot even monitor deaths, as I said. They have one (1) open testing site for the whole of Atlanta. This is not a serious effort. It is Kabuki public health.
All the experts agree, THIS is what is needed:
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/2…illions-for-covid-19.html
Anything less will ensure a disaster. A public health disaster, and an economic disaster the likes of which we have not seen since the 1930s.
QUOTES:
Senior US-government official Rick Bright says he was abruptly ousted as the chief of the agency in charge of coronavirus-vaccine development because he did not support unproven treatments promoted by US President Donald Trump. “
This is reprehensible. It would be unthinkable in any previous administration.
This suggests that most of the excess 5,330 deaths were from coronavirus, which means they undercounted by ~1,980. In other words, the number of dead was ~159% of the official count. The difference is probably smaller now, because there is more testing. Even at that, the estimate of 15,500 is probably off by ~50%. It should be ~23,000. If there have actually been 2,700,000 cases, as estimated from the antibody tests, that works out to be ~1% mortality. That is overall mortality for all age groups. That's a lot better than ~2%.
Here is another way to make a rough estimate of the likely number of unaccounted for cases. Worldmeters shows that in New York state there are 268,512 total cases and 20,792 deaths. Most of those occurred more than 2 weeks ago, so the patients have either recovered or died. Those are not on-the-fly, still-active case numbers. That is a mortality rate of 8%. That is far too high. You would not see such a high percent even in Wuhan in the early days, or in third-world conditions with no hospitals, or in the 1918 influenza. It is likely the actual mortality rate is 1% to 2%. That means actual cases are 4 to 8 times higher than the reported number of cases. Assuming all deaths have been reported, that puts total cases at 1.1 million to 2.2 million. It is in the same ballpark as 2.7 million.
Or, assuming deaths are roughly 50% higher than reported, and there are actually 31,000 deaths, the total number of cases would be 3.1 million (1% mortality) or 1.6 million (2% mortality). Again, that is in rough agreement with 2.7 million. 2.7 million is plausible.
We have found that some exposed to the virus do not develop any antibodies. A publication is on the way. These persons are asymptomatic or weakly symptomatic. Many children in this group. Probably the innate immune system that provides a natural barrier against the virus. We don't know how many though. And don't know yet how to estimate this number, this is complex. Any idea? What is sure is that this group has a non-negligible size and that in turn the IFR is lower than most believe.
The only quick way to find out is taking different tissue cells from such individuals and do screening tests. First to find out if the virus is able to enter the cell or is already blocked before. Afterwards going through the list. Does it not replicate? Why etc..
We know e.g. some effects that form our during puberty. ALL form out stops there as the stems cell change some pattern that disables ALL. (Most frequent children Leukemia!) Afterwards you get other forms.
Yes, it may mean that. That depends on how many people died unaccounted for in New York. That is a large number, but it has not been pinned down. It includes people who were never tested after they died at home, and some who were not tested after they died in the hospital. In the month ending April 4, there were 3,350 confirmed coronavirus deaths in New York City, and 5,330 more deaths than a normal year. There were fewer car accidents and industrial accidents. This suggests that most of the excess 5,330 deaths were from coronavirus, which means they undercounted by ~1,980. In other words, the number of dead was ~159% of the official count.
Come on Navid.
"Stage 4 cancer death + test -> Covid death."
Yes this is perfectly legitimate.
Unaccounted varies by 20-70%. Over counting is just on the way to be extracted from data. I expect also 20-30 %.
A person that would have died e.g. of cancer within the next three months and now dies due to corona is a cancer death not a corona death as of course the cancer made him fall. For some people it is difficult to understand the difference of the first action principle and the final cause. If the cancer patient dies of an organ failure then he not suddenly will be e.g. counted as kidney death - that would be complete nonsense. Thus no exception for corona!
We will certainly see a strong decrease in deaths after the corona infection rate goes down. This is obvious from the fact that the average live expectation of all corona deaths is the same as that from the unaffected population. In the worst case corona is just a predator nothing more.
An ambitious new plan to radically increase the number of coronavirus tests in the United States would see up to 30 million people screened each week and cost up to $100 billion.
100 Billions is what is on the 10..100x overpriced price tag of Big pharma only. Please tell me which shares I have to buy... (besides Roche..) Sorry 20$-40$ a test should be max allowed charge! Otherwise its a criminal act.
But if you did read Julians post then you understand that this plan is more fraud than a real help. What we need is to understand how many people got it without symptoms and do the ones that had it - over time - express enough anti bodies. In south Korea less than 3% of the tested had it actively but if they already had passed it?
RNA Virus can stay in the body. They can surge again if e.g. your immune system is under stress. Thats why the full containment strategy possibly will fail.
RNA Virus can stay in the body. They can surge again if e.g. your immune system is under stress. Thats why the full containment strategy possibly will fail.
No containment can work 100%. There are bound to be some cases. However, the number of cases is very low in Korea, Taiwan, New Zealand, and it would have been very low in Japan if they had not botched it. (It is now more or less under control.) So, almost-full containment does work.
We have found that some exposed to the virus do not develop any antibodies. A publication is on the way. These persons are asymptomatic or weakly symptomatic. Many children in this group. Probably the innate immune system that provides a natural barrier against the virus. We don't know how many though. And don't know yet how to estimate this number, this is complex. Any idea? What is sure is that this group has a non-negligible size and that in turn the IFR is lower than most believe.
I would survey and antibody test households where at least one member was previously confirmed with the virus. This would be an in-home survey for measuring 1) overall closeness of household quarters, 2) closeness (in time and space) of each individual to the infected individual and 3) collecting finger prick blood samples from each household member.
Correcting for 2), the null hypothesis might be that all family members would have the same antibody result (whether positive or negative). In reality however, what would probably be found is that the antibody production is correlated with increasing age and that children under 10 will generally not have antibodies.
(With influenza, things are somewhat different. Children produce antibodies to the infection, but of limited scope, restricted to the infecting organism. Adults produce a wide spectrum of antibody response. See https://mbio.asm.org/content/11/1/e03243-19 )
So ... given that the result is that children are generally immune from covid19 and produce little or no antibody, grade schools should reopen. (In Sweden they never closed.)
Kids should be allowed to play together. It's the post pubescent folks who should keep practicing social distance.
Display MoreCome on Navid.
"Stage 4 cancer death + test -> Covid death."
Yes this is perfectly legitimate.
If you shoot in the head a man with stage 4 cancer it is homicide and you get a death sentence (life sentence in civilized countries).
If you drive with a passenger who has stage 4 cancer and you smash your car into a wall you both count equally as a road accident death.
The few years or months of life expectancy left to a person with stage 4 cancer matter to them and their loved ones.
If you die from cancer, and the government tallies every person who has a shred of DNA that signals a PCR-test positive, you are not a Covid death. A person who dies of what looks like respiratory failure due to covid while having cancer, now that would be a Covid death.
The collectivizing of death into covid death -> we in fact call that fraud. Mass fraud is normal - > aluminum bodies can't penetrate thick steel beams.
A test does not determine the cause of death, the doctor does. If you really investigate the PCR test isnt' even testing for the disease accurately, but that is another matter. To this there is no debate. A PCR test is not a bullet to the head I hope we can agree on this.
