OT: CV Looking Forward

ntly at 482,000 active cases with 30,000 recovered and 20,000 dead. Withou t accounting in detail for the difference in time it takes for a case to be resolved through recovery and death, these are grim numbers.

cases and only a couple of days later than we had 50,000. Even if we assu me that deaths happen a week sooner than that, it puts the deaths from the active cases about the end of March with a total count of 144,000. That wo uld mean of the confirmed infection count 20,000 of 144,000 have died, or 1

3%. With a current active case count of half a million, that would put us at a total death count just from current infections of 65,000.

es, that puts us at 20,000 deaths from the present 500,000 which we have al ready reached. So clearly the death rate is higher than 4% in the US as a fraction of confirmed cases.

makes sense to calculate estimates of death rates on the confirmed cases. These numbers are appropriate and are of value as long as it is clear they only apply to the number of confirmed cases. No point in trying to count g hosts we can't see.

is is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being biased . I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the governmen t has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distancing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as we w ould like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

istic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or two.

g to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Oth ers will remember something else.

Some won't around to remember anything.

A couple of weeks ago John Larkin was telling us that he had a parts per mi llion changes of catching the disease.

At the time - as a US resident - he actually had a 46 ppm chance of having the disease.

California is now up to 572 cases per million population. New York is at 9,

233.

The new case rate for the USA as whole is still running at a steady 30,000 new cases per day, and John Larkin is bleating about the infection having p eaked.

At the current rate it would take 28 years to infect the whole country.

It might be sensible to note that the three worst hit states - New York, Ne w Jersey and Louisiana - have now got about half the total infections in th e US as a whole. They contain about 10% of the whole population.

The other 48 states may get the message, or may go on to get just as bad or worse.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

ntly at 482,000 active cases with 30,000 recovered and 20,000 dead. Withou t accounting in detail for the difference in time it takes for a case to be resolved through recovery and death, these are grim numbers.

cases and only a couple of days later than we had 50,000. Even if we assu me that deaths happen a week sooner than that, it puts the deaths from the active cases about the end of March with a total count of 144,000. That wo uld mean of the confirmed infection count 20,000 of 144,000 have died, or 1

3%. With a current active case count of half a million, that would put us at a total death count just from current infections of 65,000.

es, that puts us at 20,000 deaths from the present 500,000 which we have al ready reached. So clearly the death rate is higher than 4% in the US as a fraction of confirmed cases.

makes sense to calculate estimates of death rates on the confirmed cases. These numbers are appropriate and are of value as long as it is clear they only apply to the number of confirmed cases. No point in trying to count g hosts we can't see.

is is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being biased . I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the governmen t has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distancing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as we w ould like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

istic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or two.

g to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Oth ers will remember something else.

First, the Chicomms are proven liars and not to be trusted.

Second, the models VASTLY over-predicted the death count and have been modi fied downward by a factor of FOUR.

BTW, this was SCIENCE speaking, so you can get a rude awakening on how accu rate science is at predicting things, even just a few weeks in advance.

Flyguy is a proven idiot who regularly posts total nonsense.

He clearly hasn't got the faintest idea what might constitute proof.

What's that got to do with anything.

Modelling isn't an exact science, something that it's practitioners are well aware of, even if Flyguy isn't. Flyguy's brain isn't dormant - it just doesn't work - and his chance of having a rude awakening - to precisely how idiotic he is - is remote.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

After it's over, you can probably shop around and find scientific estimates that were off by a factor of 100.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

Science teaches us to doubt. 

  Claude Bernard

esently at 482,000 active cases with 30,000 recovered and 20,000 dead. Wit hout accounting in detail for the difference in time it takes for a case to be resolved through recovery and death, these are grim numbers.

ent cases and only a couple of days later than we had 50,000. Even if we a ssume that deaths happen a week sooner than that, it puts the deaths from t he active cases about the end of March with a total count of 144,000. That would mean of the confirmed infection count 20,000 of 144,000 have died, o r 13%. With a current active case count of half a million, that would put us at a total death count just from current infections of 65,000.

cases, that puts us at 20,000 deaths from the present 500,000 which we have already reached. So clearly the death rate is higher than 4% in the US as a fraction of confirmed cases.

ly makes sense to calculate estimates of death rates on the confirmed cases . These numbers are appropriate and are of value as long as it is clear th ey only apply to the number of confirmed cases. No point in trying to coun t ghosts we can't see.

This is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being bia sed. I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the govern ment has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distanc ing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as w e would like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

timistic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or t wo.

oing to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

odified downward by a factor of FOUR.

By "scientific estimates" you mean SWAGs? Yes, you can also get many an es timate on any street corner... well, maybe not so much now. I think street corners are not so populated now.

Certainly you can get many a SWAG in newsgroups!

--

  Rick C. 

  + Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  + Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Estimates of what? Every attempt to deal with a disease CHANGES THE ENVIRONMENT and the estimates, naturally, have to change as well. Nothing wrong there, just a case of effective controls put into place.

You're saying 'probably' without any data, again. For a self-proclaimed skeptic, that's a sin.

This is very predictable if you just look at the numbers without being bia sed. I guess I was not believing the 100,000 to 250,000 numbers the govern ment has released because I thought we were getting tough on social distanc ing and stay at home orders. But clearly they are not working as well as w e would like or as well as they worked in China and South Korea.

timistic number and it is likely to be much higher over the next month or t wo.

oing to make a lasting impact on us all. Some will remember the tragedy. Others will remember something else.

Flyguy never misses an opportunity to claim this. He's never provided any r elevant evidence, so it is just one meaningless bit of decoration.

odified downward by a factor of FOUR.

There are lots of models, modelling lots of different ways society could ha ve reacted to the pandemic. US society reacted incompetently, and has had l ots of infections and lots of deaths. China, South Korea, Taiwan and Austra lia have reacted better and had many fewer infections and deaths. There are probably model results around that cover an even larger range - that's wha t models are for.

If you are looking at the results alone, without looking at the assumptions they were testing.

John Larkin doesn't seem to have a clue why people construct simulations, w hat they expected to find out by running them, and what the results actuall y meant.

Modelling at fatuously extreme worst case - sub-Trump - might have predicte d even more US deaths than you have seen.

ccurate science is at predicting things, even just a few weeks in advance.

Modelling isn't an exact science, something that it's practitioners are wel l aware of, even if Flyguy isn't. Flyguy's brain isn't dormant - it just do esn't work - and his chance of having a rude awakening - to precisely how i diotic he is - is remote.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney