5 ms·
It appears this assumes a doubling rate of 3-4 days? That's pretty pessimistic compared to what the science-heads are saying, right? I've heard 5-6 days, 6.2 fr
by tunesmith 7y ago
It appears this assumes a doubling rate of 3-4 days? That's pretty pessimistic compared to what the science-heads are saying, right? I've heard 5-6 days, 6.2 from another source.
EDIT: I'm talking about the doubling rate of the actual cases, not the confirmed cases.
- Retric 7y agoThe US has averaged over 30% daily increases in infections for the last 20 days. 1.3 x 1.3 x 1.3 = 2.2x growth every 3 days making that 4 day doubling optimistic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_t... New infections are modeled to noticeably slow down once ~1/5 of the total population is infected, but at that point things have already fallen apart.
- gpm 7y agoThe US has also been ramping up testing, assuming number of infections is a linear function of known cases is a mistake.
- Retric 7y agoWe are not doing 16,000 / 42 = 380x more tests per day on March 20th vs March 1st. It’s not even obvious if we are overlooking a larger fraction of infections today than back then. Also of note that 30% daily increase I spoke of underestimates the difference between March 1 and March 20th.
- joshfraser 7y agoIt's doubling even faster right now, but that may be more related to increased testing than anything. Unfortunately, the US is further along the curve than all these sites are showing due to the fact that we didn't have any testing in the beginning (and still don't have enough).
- stevenwoo 7y agoNew York City doubled in one day - yesterday simply by having the capacity to do more tests.
- tlrobinson 7y agoRight, which isn't relevant to projecting future new infections.