4 ms·

This CDC article [1] Estimates worst case at 1.7 million deaths. Let's dig into that. They say it could be up to 214 million infected ( which is 64.8% of the p

by grecy 7y ago

This CDC article [1] Estimates worst case at 1.7 million deaths. Let's dig into that. They say it could be up to 214 million infected ( which is 64.8% of the population, so my number differs from theirs by 5.2%), but they say only 1.7 million deaths. That's a CDC projected death rate of 0.8% .... which is extremely optimistic. The WHO says 3.4% [2] China 3.6% - 6.1% [2] Italy 3-4% [2] So I have no idea why the CDC would make their estimates based on a 0.8% death rate. That doesn't seem realistic to me, especially when we know the US has less hospital beds per capita than for example Italy. [1] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/03/cdcs-worst-case-coronavirus-model-210m-infected-1-7m-dead.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/03/cdcs-worst-case-coro... [2] https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-peop...

solidasparagus 7y ago
So first off I've spent enough time with people in epidemiology/at the CDC to know that I (and probably you) don't know enough to have a more accurate armchair analysis than what their experts produce. Second, I would imagine ICU/critical care beds per capita is a better predictor of fatality rate than hospital beds and the US is very well equipped in that regard. The US medical system has numerous flaws, but in terms of technical ability to keep extremely sick people alive, the US is pretty good. We can debate the details, but since neither of us are experts it's probably a waste of time. However, there is absolutely no basis to say "best-case estimates right now have US deaths at 2 million". It is blatantly untrue - it directly contradicts every single expert analysis that I have seen.
tathougies 7y ago
The us has more icu beds than italy.
- stevekemp 7y ago
  Percapita? Obviously there are more American ICU beds in absolute numbers, but also there is a bigger population.
thu2111 7y ago
Because in South Korea the rate is more like 0.5% and they've done the most testing. As far as I can tell, basically all the data around this epidemic is so dubious it's nearly useless. We use it anyway because ignoring data is really hard when the alternative is intellectual darkness. Yes, that's a strong claim, but look at the error bars! Above in this thread we have someone giving two estimates for total dead in the USA that vary by a whole order of magnitude. A difficulty with all current rates is that nobody knows the denominator: how many cases are there really? Some cases are asymptomatic, many are mild, people got the message by now to stay home and try to avoid overloading the health system so they aren't necessarily going to turn up to get tested unless they start to feel really quite bad. To know this you'd need mass random testing of the population, but nobody is doing that, not even in South Korea. If you divide deaths by cases that turned up at hospital you get these higher rates. But that can't then be multiplied by population figures to derive total expected death rates. It's more like a "death rate of those who make themselves known because they have severe symptoms". Another problem with these stats is people tend to interpret them as "number of people who will die who otherwise wouldn't have", i.e. imagining a drop in the population graph. But many of those who are dying were about to die of old age or other factors, so deviation from standard death rate isn't going to be that high. The causes of death will shift, but the total number will be less than a simple "Chinese rate * population" calculation.

by grecy 7y ago

solidasparagus 7y ago

So first off I've spent enough time with people in epidemiology/at the CDC to know that I (and probably you) don't know enough to have a more accurate armchair analysis than what their experts produce. Second, I would imagine ICU/critical care beds per capita is a better predictor of fatality rate than hospital beds and the US is very well equipped in that regard. The US medical system has numerous flaws, but in terms of technical ability to keep extremely sick people alive, the US is pretty good. We can debate the details, but since neither of us are experts it's probably a waste of time. However, there is absolutely no basis to say "best-case estimates right now have US deaths at 2 million". It is blatantly untrue - it directly contradicts every single expert analysis that I have seen.

tathougies 7y ago

The us has more icu beds than italy.

stevekemp 7y ago
Percapita? Obviously there are more American ICU beds in absolute numbers, but also there is a bigger population.

thu2111 7y ago

Because in South Korea the rate is more like 0.5% and they've done the most testing. As far as I can tell, basically all the data around this epidemic is so dubious it's nearly useless. We use it anyway because ignoring data is really hard when the alternative is intellectual darkness. Yes, that's a strong claim, but look at the error bars! Above in this thread we have someone giving two estimates for total dead in the USA that vary by a whole order of magnitude. A difficulty with all current rates is that nobody knows the denominator: how many cases are there really? Some cases are asymptomatic, many are mild, people got the message by now to stay home and try to avoid overloading the health system so they aren't necessarily going to turn up to get tested unless they start to feel really quite bad. To know this you'd need mass random testing of the population, but nobody is doing that, not even in South Korea. If you divide deaths by cases that turned up at hospital you get these higher rates. But that can't then be multiplied by population figures to derive total expected death rates. It's more like a "death rate of those who make themselves known because they have severe symptoms". Another problem with these stats is people tend to interpret them as "number of people who will die who otherwise wouldn't have", i.e. imagining a drop in the population graph. But many of those who are dying were about to die of old age or other factors, so deviation from standard death rate isn't going to be that high. The causes of death will shift, but the total number will be less than a simple "Chinese rate * population" calculation.