Author
Topic: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas
(Read 746405 times)

Cincydawg · « **Reply #10934 on:** November 23, 2020, 10:21:32 AM »

I did a bit of work on filtration a while back, it's not as simple as just "interception" because pores are smaller than the filtrate, though that is a factor of course.

Electrostatics offer some additional capability if the charge is maintained constantly (and if the filtrate is charged of course).

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #10935 on:** November 23, 2020, 10:34:28 AM »

Quote from: bwarbiany on November 02, 2020, 10:36:10 AM

5 weeks is important, as that's basically when we saw the cases turn.

So go back 3 weeks. That's Oct 12. (Sorry, should be Oct 11 as I was assuming 3 weeks from Nov 2 and don't want to retype everything below).

Oct 12 we had a daily 7-day MA case rate of about 50.7K. 2 weeks prior to that (to get to the 5 week total) on Sep 28 we had a 7-day MA case rate of 41.7K. That's a 21.5% increase.

Now, because we know there's a roughly 3 week lag between cases and deaths, we compare today's 7-day MA against the 7-day MA two weeks ago.

Nov 1 we have a 7-day MA for deaths of 851. Two weeks prior (Oct 18) was 726. That's a 17.2% increase.

So we don't have quite a proportional rise in deaths (at this point), as only about 80% of new cases seem to convert into a rise in deaths.

But... We look at Oct 12 and we had 50.7K cases (7-day MA). Yesterday that number moved up to 82.7K. That's a 63.1% increase in the past 3 weeks. If the same 80% number holds, we should see a 50.5% increase in deaths by Nov 22.

So my prediction for the 7-day MA of daily death rate, on Nov 22, is that we'll be at about 1281/day.

Let's revisit in 3 weeks and see if that holds...

Turns out I was quite low.

It is 1547/day.

longhorn320 · « **Reply #10936 on:** November 23, 2020, 10:51:03 AM »

Quote from: bwarbiany on November 23, 2020, 10:34:28 AM

Turns out I was quite low.

It is 1547/day.

only because the increase in cases was quite a bit higher then projected

so far deaths remain below the assumed 1.85% of positive cases previously experienced

847badgerfan · « **Reply #10937 on:** November 23, 2020, 10:59:22 AM »

Quote from: longhorn320 on November 23, 2020, 10:51:03 AM

only because the increase in cases was quite a bit higher then projected

so far deaths remain below the assumed 1.85% of positive cases previously experienced

Yes, the death rates are dropping here too. The peak was in the summer.

60% of the cases are in 7 counties, as would be expected. Dade is the worst - 23% of all Florida cases are there, and 21% of deaths.

betarhoalphadelta · « **Reply #10938 on:** November 23, 2020, 11:21:38 AM »

Quote from: longhorn320 on November 23, 2020, 10:51:03 AM

only because the increase in cases was quite a bit higher then projected

so far deaths remain below the assumed 1.85% of positive cases previously experienced

Quote from: 847badgerfan on November 23, 2020, 10:59:22 AM

Yes, the death rates are dropping here too. The peak was in the summer.

60% of the cases are in 7 counties, as would be expected. Dade is the worst - 23% of all Florida cases are there, and 21% of deaths.

In the summer, the cases (7-day MA) peaked about July 25 at 70289, and the deaths peaked about Aug 4, at 1181. That's a death rate of ~1.68%. The cases had actually plateaued at roughly that level a week or so before July 25, and the deaths had plateauded about 3-4 days prior to Aug 4, so those were fairly stable numbers.

This one is harder to tell because cases were rising sharply at the point I did my analysis, not plateaued. On Nov 1 we had a daily case (7 day MA) of 84030. The Nov 22 death rate of 1547 is about a 1.84% death rate as measured against the case rate 3 weeks ago.

Now, it's possible that some of those 1547 were due to the high jump in cases between Nov 1 and Nov 8--After all my dates of July 25->Aug 4 was closer to 2 weeks than 3. Nov 8 was at a 7-day MA of 112630. 1547 against that would be 1.37%.

I think it's fair to somewhat split the difference and state that the death rate is showing no statistically significant differences between the summer spike and now.

longhorn320 · « **Reply #10939 on:** November 23, 2020, 11:33:36 AM »

As our Gov Abbott recently said its not possible to support a lockdown when over 98% of the folks testing positive recover

He believes masks and safe distancing is the answer

Cincydawg · « **Reply #10940 on:** November 23, 2020, 11:33:46 AM »

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2771761

I see some folks persisting in calling this entire thing a hoax, it's something they view as barely worth notice, just a mild flu or something. They concoct doctored statistics of course, FB memes, it's pretty disgusting to me.

Previous studies of excess deaths (the gap between observed and expected deaths) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic found that publicly reported COVID-19 deaths underestimated the full death toll, which includes documented and undocumented deaths from the virus and non–COVID-19 deaths caused by disruptions from the pandemic.¹^,2 A previous analysis found that COVID-19 was cited in only 65% of excess deaths in the first weeks of the pandemic (March-April 2020); deaths from non–COVID-19 causes (eg, Alzheimer disease, diabetes, heart disease) increased sharply in 5 states with the most COVID-19 deaths.¹ This study updates through August 1, 2020, the estimate of excess deaths and explores temporal relationships with state reopenings (lifting of coronavirus restrictions).

FearlessF · « **Reply #10941 on:** November 23, 2020, 12:04:23 PM »

so, for the guy who isn't great with math or memory..........

how many total deaths the past few years, and how many total deaths this year?

Cincydawg · « **Reply #10942 on:** November 23, 2020, 12:10:49 PM »

Between March 1 and August 1, 2020, 1 336 561 deaths occurred in the US, a 20% increase over expected deaths (1 111 031 [95% CI, 1 110 364 to 1 111 697]). The 10 states with the highest per capita rate of excess deaths were New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Louisiana, Arizona, Mississippi, Maryland, Delaware, Rhode Island, and Michigan. The states with the highest per capita rate of excess deaths changed from week to week (Video). The increase in absolute deaths in these states relative to expected values ranged from 22% in Rhode Island and Michigan to 65% in New York (Table). Three states with the highest death rates (New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts) accounted for 30% of US excess deaths but had the shortest epidemics (ED⁹⁰ < 10 weeks). States that experienced acute surges in April (and reopened later) had shorter epidemics that returned to baseline in May, whereas states that reopened earlier experienced more protracted increases in excess deaths that extended into the summer (Figure).

Of the 225 530 excess deaths, 150 541 (67%) were attributed to COVID-19. Joinpoint analyses revealed an increase in deaths attributed to causes other than COVID-19, with 2 reaching statistical significance. US mortality rates for heart disease increased between weeks ending March 21 and April 11 (APC, 5.1 [95% CI, 0.2-10.2]), driven by the spring surge in COVID-19 cases. Mortality rates for Alzheimer disease/dementia increased twice, between weeks ending March 21 and April 11 (APC, 7.3 [95% CI, 2.9-11.8]) and between weeks ending June 6 and July 25 (APC, 1.5 [95% CI, 0.8-2.3]), the latter coinciding with the summer surge in sunbelt states.

utee94 · « **Reply #10943 on:** November 23, 2020, 12:22:13 PM »

I don't think the March-August data tells enough of the story. I'm more interested in the total deaths for the entire year of 2020, compared to average or expected deaths from other years' annual data.

Since this virus obviously has worse outcomes for the elderly and infirm, I suspect we'll find that many of the COVID deaths are actually deaths that have been pulled-ahead in time by 6-12 months. Especially when we see the nursing homes get hit so hard, and average life expectancy of nursing home patients is very short once they enter the facility.

I'm not suggesting that their lives matter any less, but from a scientific perspective, we know this isn't ripping through young and healthy populations with severely negative outcomes, so it's reasonable to expect that much of its effect is a pull-ahead.

FearlessF · « **Reply #10944 on:** November 23, 2020, 12:23:30 PM »

so, perhaps we have more total deaths than usual this year, but less total deaths than usual next year?

Cincydawg · « **Reply #10945 on:** November 23, 2020, 12:27:11 PM »

To the extent this has "thinned the herd", death totals could go down in the future. The death toll in the US is remarkably constant year over year, and is up about 300,000 this year (last I looked), from 2 million expected (12 months).

So, IF that 300,000 was going to die in the next 2-3 years (significantly), we might see a reduction, but it might be 50,000 a year or so, maybe.

utee94 · « **Reply #10946 on:** November 23, 2020, 12:29:51 PM »

Quote from: FearlessF on November 23, 2020, 12:23:30 PM

so, perhaps we have more total deaths than usual this year, but less total deaths than usual next year?

Yes, that is what I am speculating.

Riffraft · « **Reply #10947 on:** November 23, 2020, 02:00:02 PM »

Quote from: OrangeAfroMan on November 20, 2020, 01:18:43 PM

Brilliant.

Thank you for the compliment. Really surprised you thought so.

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.

Topic: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

Cincydawg

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

betarhoalphadelta

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

longhorn320

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

847badgerfan

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

betarhoalphadelta

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

longhorn320

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

Cincydawg

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

FearlessF

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

Cincydawg

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

utee94

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

FearlessF

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

Cincydawg

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

utee94

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas

Riffraft

Re: Coronavirus discussion and Quarantine ideas