6 ms·

We can't possibly have enough data, and even enough time since the start of the pandemic to come to this conclusion. To know if something is seasonal, we must f

We can't possibly have enough data, and even enough time since the start of the pandemic to come to this conclusion. To know if something is seasonal, we must first let a couple of years pass and measure and compare the numbers with previous years, no? Disclaimer: I am not an expert. I believe in science, and its conclusions. All I wanted to know is if there's enough data points to plot a long-term trend.

SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
You're right, we won't know if this is an nadir or not in the whole thing, but she seems to be warning against the idea that this is the off season and we don't have to worry about it. I can't figure out who the target audience is for - the people who have written off COVID also seem to have written off the WHO, and those who haven't see that there's still a major ongoing problem.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- stx 6y ago
  I don't trust the WHO but I have certainly not written off COVID. I think the WHO has too much China influence but I think they may still have some accurate information. I don't know if its seasonal or not yet although I could see experts could start making predictions already. To me though it is not one big wave. Watching the numbers in the USA and other countries it appears that as restrictions are lifted cases rise. When they rise we add restrictions and they go down at a much slower rate. Its many smaller waves.
  - SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
    Yeah, the relationship I implied doesn't actually work both ways - but anyone who has written off the WHO is sure not to take their advice, and I have a hard time seeing anyone who hasn't written off WHO ignoring COVID. But people who have written off the WHO could still not write off COVID. And based upon your assessment, you'd seem to agree with her point - "It’s going to be one big wave. It’s going to go up and down a bit. The best thing is to flatten it and turn it into just something lapping at your feet"
  - glennpratt 6y ago
    The fact that restrictions are effective or cause rate changes has nothing to do with the seasonal behavior of virus. The fact that restrictions don't cause immediate drops is pretty obvious A) there is time lag and B) no restrictions are 100% effective. It takes time for a change in the rate of spread to compound into reductions. "many smaller waves" does not seem relevant to understanding the virus and in fact is what they are warning against. Where I live, if you dig down, "waves" appear to be simple thing, super spreader events at essential businesses and churches. > WHO officials have been at pains to avoid describing a resurgence of COVID-19 cases like those in Hong Kong as “waves” as this suggests the virus is behaving in ways beyond human control, when in fact concerted action can slow its spread.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
throwaway_kufu 6y ago
I think there is enough information/data to be gained from the virus itself to determine if it has the same or similar characteristics of other corona viruses (like influenza) to support seasonality or season-less continuity.
- sveme 6y ago
  Influenza is no Corona virus.
  - SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
    And just to be clear, it's neither like the Coronavirus (COVID-19), nor is it any sort of Coronavirus - it's the Influenza virus.
kn0where 6y ago
It’s well into summer in the northern hemisphere and the virus is still spreading as rapidly as ever, so that would be pretty good reason to think it’s not seasonal like the flu, which dies down a lot in the summer.
- icedchai 6y ago
  Maybe this is "died down"... That is scary to think. It could get worse in the winter. We just don't know.
  - mdgrech23 6y ago
    That's been my hunch too. It's going to be a dark winter.
  - stx 6y ago
    This is what worries me. Although I would imagine that if that was the case we might be seeing it in the southern hemisphere already.
    - lbebber 6y ago
      FWIW it is getting worse just now in the south of Brazil, where we have colder winters.
      - stx 6y ago
        I always think of Brazil as hot and humid but I have never been there. How cold does it get in southern Brazil? I also never realized how large some countries are as far as population.
        lbebber 6y ago
        We've had -3ºC these weeks, which is about as cold as it gets here. It snows in some regions but it's a bit rare, once in a year in some places, once in a decade in others.
covid2019 6y ago
It wasn’t on westerners radars until February in any serious way. It spread through Winter 2019, Spring 2020, and is spreading during Summer 2020 when trying to “re-open.” Pretty sure measurable science to support the idea exists. Oh sure that trend may change, but come on, RIGHT NOW it’s literally showing no signs of fading away if we “live normally.” Why do you need 18 more months of plotting data to decide on what’s literally happening right before your eyes?
- glofish 6y ago
  As counter intuitive as it sounds there is reason to believe that currently the penetration of the disease is much lower than in March. The modeling from IMHE claims that in March the number of daily new infections were above 250K whereas today are about 120K. https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america see the tab called Infections and Testing It just that we were measuring a lot many more people now. But it is true that in June there were fewer cases than today, but by far the most cases were in the Winter. How else would be in the situation where 10% of population is already seropostive and at least as many don't develop antibodies since their symptoms are mild, thus we are probably over 20% of people having had the disease.
  - knzhou 6y ago
    > The modeling from IMHE shows that in March the number of daily new infections were above 250K whereas today are about 120K. Yeah, but the IHME model is also extremely bad. It consists almost entirely of fitting a Gaussian to the number of cases over time. It’s mathematically impossible in their model for the case count to not go down.
    - glofish 6y ago
      I am not sure I follow. For any epidemic that is well underway it is impossible for the number cases not to go down over time, it is only the time frame that is under question perhaps.
  - covid2019 6y ago
SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
> We can't possibly have enough data, and even enough time since the start of the pandemic to come to this conclusion. For, Pro, Against, Anti, WHO, CDC, vaccine, masks, orders... etc etc etc... I’ve been thinking this same thing since March. I’m absolutely fine being cautious and doing the right thing, but I think everyone pretends “the science is settled” on these things and it changes weekly - and it should because a lot of it is new - but now that’s used as a weapon by everyone invoked. Kinda sick of it. It should be totally OK to say “we don’t know, so we won’t guess”.
- iso1631 6y ago
  We don't know, we won't guess, but we have to have a policy, and that policy is based on what we do know. If what we do know changes, we change the policy. The problem with that is that policy changing every week is not something that western populations can deal with, so policy changes have to be dampened somewhat.
  - SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
    I don’t think I necessarily disagreed with that. The WHO saying it’s one big wave, is a guess though.
fractal618 6y ago
The more they say the less credibility they have
gizmo 6y ago
Covid-19 hardly mutates and people who were exposed to SARS 17 years ago have immunity to covid today. So yes, it’s pretty safe to say there won’t be a second wave of any significance. This was known since Februari and I don’t understand why you would think this disease will be seasonal when it isn’t anything like the seasonal viruses we know that mutate and don’t trigger good immune responses. (It is seasonal in the sense that the R0 is higher in the winter when people are cooped together, but once you've got sufficient exposure in the community a second wave won't happen regardless)
- mynegation 6y ago
  > Covid-19 hardly mutates and people who were exposed to SARS 17 years ago have immunity to covid today. Citation, please. Any credible sources that I could find say that protection correlation with SARS is not clearly established and antibody levels to SARS fall off between 2-3 years after infection. > there won’t be a second wave of any significance There will or will not be but certainly not for the reasons you mention. Unlike flu and older coronaviruses, SARS-Cov-2 R_t seems to be driven exclusively by containment measures, not by seasonality, at least not at the present. > once you've got sufficient exposure in the community a second wave won't happen regardless We are nowhere near the "sufficient exposure" and it is already the most impactful pandemic in the last 100 years.
  - lbeltrame 6y ago
    > Any credible sources that I could find say that protection correlation with SARS is not clearly established and antibody levels to SARS fall off between 2-3 years after infection. It was T-cell immunity, not humoral immunity like with antibodies. Absence of antibodies != absence of immunity. And here's the citation: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z
coronadisaster 6y ago
They probably have more data than you do.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  They had more data in January as well, it didn't stop WHO from lying.

SketchySeaBeast 6y ago

You're right, we won't know if this is an nadir or not in the whole thing, but she seems to be warning against the idea that this is the off season and we don't have to worry about it. I can't figure out who the target audience is for - the people who have written off COVID also seem to have written off the WHO, and those who haven't see that there's still a major ongoing problem.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
stx 6y ago
I don't trust the WHO but I have certainly not written off COVID. I think the WHO has too much China influence but I think they may still have some accurate information. I don't know if its seasonal or not yet although I could see experts could start making predictions already. To me though it is not one big wave. Watching the numbers in the USA and other countries it appears that as restrictions are lifted cases rise. When they rise we add restrictions and they go down at a much slower rate. Its many smaller waves.
- SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
  Yeah, the relationship I implied doesn't actually work both ways - but anyone who has written off the WHO is sure not to take their advice, and I have a hard time seeing anyone who hasn't written off WHO ignoring COVID. But people who have written off the WHO could still not write off COVID. And based upon your assessment, you'd seem to agree with her point - "It’s going to be one big wave. It’s going to go up and down a bit. The best thing is to flatten it and turn it into just something lapping at your feet"
- glennpratt 6y ago
  The fact that restrictions are effective or cause rate changes has nothing to do with the seasonal behavior of virus. The fact that restrictions don't cause immediate drops is pretty obvious A) there is time lag and B) no restrictions are 100% effective. It takes time for a change in the rate of spread to compound into reductions. "many smaller waves" does not seem relevant to understanding the virus and in fact is what they are warning against. Where I live, if you dig down, "waves" appear to be simple thing, super spreader events at essential businesses and churches. > WHO officials have been at pains to avoid describing a resurgence of COVID-19 cases like those in Hong Kong as “waves” as this suggests the virus is behaving in ways beyond human control, when in fact concerted action can slow its spread.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

throwaway_kufu 6y ago

I think there is enough information/data to be gained from the virus itself to determine if it has the same or similar characteristics of other corona viruses (like influenza) to support seasonality or season-less continuity.

sveme 6y ago
Influenza is no Corona virus.
- SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
  And just to be clear, it's neither like the Coronavirus (COVID-19), nor is it any sort of Coronavirus - it's the Influenza virus.

kn0where 6y ago

It’s well into summer in the northern hemisphere and the virus is still spreading as rapidly as ever, so that would be pretty good reason to think it’s not seasonal like the flu, which dies down a lot in the summer.

icedchai 6y ago
Maybe this is "died down"... That is scary to think. It could get worse in the winter. We just don't know.
- mdgrech23 6y ago
  That's been my hunch too. It's going to be a dark winter.
- stx 6y ago
  This is what worries me. Although I would imagine that if that was the case we might be seeing it in the southern hemisphere already.
  - lbebber 6y ago
    FWIW it is getting worse just now in the south of Brazil, where we have colder winters.
    - stx 6y ago
      I always think of Brazil as hot and humid but I have never been there. How cold does it get in southern Brazil? I also never realized how large some countries are as far as population.
      - lbebber 6y ago
        We've had -3ºC these weeks, which is about as cold as it gets here. It snows in some regions but it's a bit rare, once in a year in some places, once in a decade in others.

covid2019 6y ago

It wasn’t on westerners radars until February in any serious way. It spread through Winter 2019, Spring 2020, and is spreading during Summer 2020 when trying to “re-open.” Pretty sure measurable science to support the idea exists. Oh sure that trend may change, but come on, RIGHT NOW it’s literally showing no signs of fading away if we “live normally.” Why do you need 18 more months of plotting data to decide on what’s literally happening right before your eyes?

glofish 6y ago
As counter intuitive as it sounds there is reason to believe that currently the penetration of the disease is much lower than in March. The modeling from IMHE claims that in March the number of daily new infections were above 250K whereas today are about 120K. https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america see the tab called Infections and Testing It just that we were measuring a lot many more people now. But it is true that in June there were fewer cases than today, but by far the most cases were in the Winter. How else would be in the situation where 10% of population is already seropostive and at least as many don't develop antibodies since their symptoms are mild, thus we are probably over 20% of people having had the disease.
- knzhou 6y ago
  > The modeling from IMHE shows that in March the number of daily new infections were above 250K whereas today are about 120K. Yeah, but the IHME model is also extremely bad. It consists almost entirely of fitting a Gaussian to the number of cases over time. It’s mathematically impossible in their model for the case count to not go down.
  - glofish 6y ago
    I am not sure I follow. For any epidemic that is well underway it is impossible for the number cases not to go down over time, it is only the time frame that is under question perhaps.
- covid2019 6y ago

SV_BubbleTime 6y ago

> We can't possibly have enough data, and even enough time since the start of the pandemic to come to this conclusion. For, Pro, Against, Anti, WHO, CDC, vaccine, masks, orders... etc etc etc... I’ve been thinking this same thing since March. I’m absolutely fine being cautious and doing the right thing, but I think everyone pretends “the science is settled” on these things and it changes weekly - and it should because a lot of it is new - but now that’s used as a weapon by everyone invoked. Kinda sick of it. It should be totally OK to say “we don’t know, so we won’t guess”.

iso1631 6y ago
We don't know, we won't guess, but we have to have a policy, and that policy is based on what we do know. If what we do know changes, we change the policy. The problem with that is that policy changing every week is not something that western populations can deal with, so policy changes have to be dampened somewhat.
- SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
  I don’t think I necessarily disagreed with that. The WHO saying it’s one big wave, is a guess though.

fractal618 6y ago

The more they say the less credibility they have

gizmo 6y ago

Covid-19 hardly mutates and people who were exposed to SARS 17 years ago have immunity to covid today. So yes, it’s pretty safe to say there won’t be a second wave of any significance. This was known since Februari and I don’t understand why you would think this disease will be seasonal when it isn’t anything like the seasonal viruses we know that mutate and don’t trigger good immune responses. (It is seasonal in the sense that the R0 is higher in the winter when people are cooped together, but once you've got sufficient exposure in the community a second wave won't happen regardless)

mynegation 6y ago
> Covid-19 hardly mutates and people who were exposed to SARS 17 years ago have immunity to covid today. Citation, please. Any credible sources that I could find say that protection correlation with SARS is not clearly established and antibody levels to SARS fall off between 2-3 years after infection. > there won’t be a second wave of any significance There will or will not be but certainly not for the reasons you mention. Unlike flu and older coronaviruses, SARS-Cov-2 R_t seems to be driven exclusively by containment measures, not by seasonality, at least not at the present. > once you've got sufficient exposure in the community a second wave won't happen regardless We are nowhere near the "sufficient exposure" and it is already the most impactful pandemic in the last 100 years.
- lbeltrame 6y ago
  > Any credible sources that I could find say that protection correlation with SARS is not clearly established and antibody levels to SARS fall off between 2-3 years after infection. It was T-cell immunity, not humoral immunity like with antibodies. Absence of antibodies != absence of immunity. And here's the citation: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z

coronadisaster 6y ago

They probably have more data than you do.

xiphias2 6y ago
They had more data in January as well, it didn't stop WHO from lying.