7 ms·

Yesterday (and the day prior) had the lowest corona deaths since late March.

by eanzenberg 6y ago

claudeganon 6y ago
Deaths are a lagging indicator. 2-4 weeks behind case counts.
- eanzenberg 6y ago
  Cases started increasing above norm 4 weeks ago.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- karlakush 6y ago
  Not true. Deaths only lag cases by 5-10 days. For example, in Italy daily new cases peaked on March 21st and daily deaths peaked on March 27th.
  - elihu 6y ago
    Doesn't that depend a great deal on testing capability? If testing is quick and widely available, then I'd expect the lag to be larger as people get diagnosed earlier.
  - perl4ever 6y ago
    This assumes the death rate is independent of, say, health care system capacity. Didn't they have an issue with that in Italy?
- eanzenberg 6y ago
  I’m not sure why a child-comment got killed: >>> Not true. Deaths only lag cases by 5-10 days. For example, in Italy daily new cases peaked on March 21st and daily deaths peaked on March 27th. This is correct. People are expecting a step function of deaths exactly 4 weeks from the peak of cases? This is not statistical. Peak of deaths lag peak of cases closer to 1-5 days. If case growth is a matter of true rise of infections we would see modest increase of deaths about 2-3 weeks ago (cases started growing 4 weeks ago). We’ve only seen deaths drop on a exponential decay trend.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    Isn't it plausible this could be affected by other the changes in infection demographics, testing capability, and treatment options we've seen since then?
    - eanzenberg 6y ago
      Yes, it’s related to all those things including the never-talked-about problem that the lockdown is ineffective at suppressing the inevitable spread of corona
jerf 6y ago
The media isn't inclined to pitch it this way ("DOOM! GLOOM! FIRE IN THE SKY! News at 11!"), but technically, the ideal outcome is essentially everybody has already had it and deaths (and serious hospitalizations) are at zero. Remember "flatten the curve"? It's not "eliminate the curve". We're pretty much all going to be exposed to it at some point. Lots of people testing positive without ever having had to go to the hospital or even having been aware they had it is a good thing, not a reason to go shutting everything down again. It means the crisis is nearly over, not the worst it's ever been. After all, consider what that would imply; for all infectious diseases, the level of crisis starts low, then monotonically goes up and never goes back down? Clearly that does not describe the real world we see, which is not still in crisis over the Spanish Flu, Black Death, and every other plague ever. The level of crisis can't be solely a function of the number of people testing as positive. Hospitalizations and deaths are the bad numbers, not number of positives.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  >>The media isn't inclined to pitch it this way ("DOOM! GLOOM! FIRE IN THE SKY! News at 11!"), but technically, the ideal outcome is essentially everybody has already had it and deaths (and serious hospitalizations) are at zero. That's literally the worst case endgame, where everyone vulnerable has received the full brunt of the disease lessened only by medical care. The ideal outcome is that the spread is minimized by a mix of general and targeted social distancing and containment measures until a vaccine, effective treatment, or both are deployed widely enough to eradicate the disease.
- anoncake 6y ago
  Quite a lot of people do want to eliminate the curve until we've produced and deployed billions of doses of the vaccine we don't have.
  - eanzenberg 6y ago
    The majority don’t, though. The country did not sign up for a quarantine until vaccine was released, if ever. People are free to quarantine until vaccines are out, but please don’t force this oppression on everyone else.
Spooky23 6y ago
Exactly. It takes 3-14 days for symptoms to appear and 10-14 for happy path resolution. The big protests were about two weeks ago. Hence the spoke. The holiday just passed. So two weeks from now you’ll see a big wave of deaths and increasing caseloads. If we are fortunate, the hospitals in the south will keep up with the surges in caseload and limited beds. If not, you’ll have the freezer trailers with stacked corpses like you saw in Queens.
- perl4ever 6y ago
  I'm pretty doubtful that there was a spike. The states like Texas, Florida, California, and Arizona have just been increasing gradually all the time. And NY didn't spike, even though there were protests. The national "spike" appears to me to be a phenomenon of adding up the individual states, where the declines were overtaken by the rises. Do you/we have any good reason to believe that outdoor gatherings are much of a problem? The impression I've gotten is that indoors is where most instances of large amounts of people getting infected at once happens.

Yesterday (and the day prior) had the lowest corona deaths since late March.

claudeganon 6y ago

Deaths are a lagging indicator. 2-4 weeks behind case counts.

eanzenberg 6y ago
Cases started increasing above norm 4 weeks ago.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
karlakush 6y ago
Not true. Deaths only lag cases by 5-10 days. For example, in Italy daily new cases peaked on March 21st and daily deaths peaked on March 27th.
- elihu 6y ago
  Doesn't that depend a great deal on testing capability? If testing is quick and widely available, then I'd expect the lag to be larger as people get diagnosed earlier.
- perl4ever 6y ago
  This assumes the death rate is independent of, say, health care system capacity. Didn't they have an issue with that in Italy?
eanzenberg 6y ago
I’m not sure why a child-comment got killed: >>> Not true. Deaths only lag cases by 5-10 days. For example, in Italy daily new cases peaked on March 21st and daily deaths peaked on March 27th. This is correct. People are expecting a step function of deaths exactly 4 weeks from the peak of cases? This is not statistical. Peak of deaths lag peak of cases closer to 1-5 days. If case growth is a matter of true rise of infections we would see modest increase of deaths about 2-3 weeks ago (cases started growing 4 weeks ago). We’ve only seen deaths drop on a exponential decay trend.
- kube-system 6y ago
  Isn't it plausible this could be affected by other the changes in infection demographics, testing capability, and treatment options we've seen since then?
  - eanzenberg 6y ago
    Yes, it’s related to all those things including the never-talked-about problem that the lockdown is ineffective at suppressing the inevitable spread of corona

jerf 6y ago

The media isn't inclined to pitch it this way ("DOOM! GLOOM! FIRE IN THE SKY! News at 11!"), but technically, the ideal outcome is essentially everybody has already had it and deaths (and serious hospitalizations) are at zero. Remember "flatten the curve"? It's not "eliminate the curve". We're pretty much all going to be exposed to it at some point. Lots of people testing positive without ever having had to go to the hospital or even having been aware they had it is a good thing, not a reason to go shutting everything down again. It means the crisis is nearly over, not the worst it's ever been. After all, consider what that would imply; for all infectious diseases, the level of crisis starts low, then monotonically goes up and never goes back down? Clearly that does not describe the real world we see, which is not still in crisis over the Spanish Flu, Black Death, and every other plague ever. The level of crisis can't be solely a function of the number of people testing as positive. Hospitalizations and deaths are the bad numbers, not number of positives.

dragonwriter 6y ago
>>The media isn't inclined to pitch it this way ("DOOM! GLOOM! FIRE IN THE SKY! News at 11!"), but technically, the ideal outcome is essentially everybody has already had it and deaths (and serious hospitalizations) are at zero. That's literally the worst case endgame, where everyone vulnerable has received the full brunt of the disease lessened only by medical care. The ideal outcome is that the spread is minimized by a mix of general and targeted social distancing and containment measures until a vaccine, effective treatment, or both are deployed widely enough to eradicate the disease.
anoncake 6y ago
Quite a lot of people do want to eliminate the curve until we've produced and deployed billions of doses of the vaccine we don't have.
- eanzenberg 6y ago
  The majority don’t, though. The country did not sign up for a quarantine until vaccine was released, if ever. People are free to quarantine until vaccines are out, but please don’t force this oppression on everyone else.

Spooky23 6y ago

Exactly. It takes 3-14 days for symptoms to appear and 10-14 for happy path resolution. The big protests were about two weeks ago. Hence the spoke. The holiday just passed. So two weeks from now you’ll see a big wave of deaths and increasing caseloads. If we are fortunate, the hospitals in the south will keep up with the surges in caseload and limited beds. If not, you’ll have the freezer trailers with stacked corpses like you saw in Queens.

perl4ever 6y ago
I'm pretty doubtful that there was a spike. The states like Texas, Florida, California, and Arizona have just been increasing gradually all the time. And NY didn't spike, even though there were protests. The national "spike" appears to me to be a phenomenon of adding up the individual states, where the declines were overtaken by the rises. Do you/we have any good reason to believe that outdoor gatherings are much of a problem? The impression I've gotten is that indoors is where most instances of large amounts of people getting infected at once happens.