Home        About Dan        News        Books        Forum        Art
 
   
Page 1 of 1 1
Topic Options
#169807 - 04/23/20 02:07 PM COVID-19 claims and mutually exclusive arguments
jryan Offline
Hardcase


Registered: 06/08/07
Posts: 8610
Loc: Oakton VA
We have all seen the claims by the press and the Democrats (I repeat myself) that make two essential claims. The first claim is that the COVID-19 virus is far more virulent and deadly than Influenza, and second due to these two facts, Trump's response to COVID-19 response was woefully insufficient and failed to contain the virus.

I will now set out to prove that both claims can not be true at the same time. Consider the following scenarios, with the only presumed concrete fact being the number of deaths from (or attributed to) COVID-19, and using the widely believed mortality rate of 1% to tear down the rest of the facade:

Scenario 1) 47,000 people have died AND the mortality rate is 1% ... which would mean that total infections are 4,700,000 nationwide... from that we would conclude that only 1.4% of the population has been infected, which would show that containment was VERY successful.

Scenario 2) 47,000 people have died AND containment failed... If we assume that the total infection base is, say, 9x higher than we derived from Scenario 1 (equal to a regular year for influenza), then the mortality rate would be 0.15%

Scenario 3) 47,000 people have died AND containment failed AND COVID-19 is far more virulent than Influenza... We then assume that the spread exceeds that of Influenza, or equal to a bad flu season, at which point we assume 60,000,000 cases nationwide... and a mortality rate of 0.08%

Which scenario do you believe is true? They are mutually exclusive. Personally I think it is most likely Scenario 1 or Scenario 3... but you can't argue that the administration botched the response AND a mortality rate of 1%, because the assumptions required to draw either conclusion are mutually exclusive.


Edited by jryan (04/23/20 02:11 PM)
_________________________
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts” - Richard Feynman

Top
#169811 - 04/26/20 08:40 PM Re: COVID-19 claims and mutually exclusive arguments [Re: jryan]
Peter McKenna Offline
old hand


Registered: 06/07/13
Posts: 1173
Loc: Louisiana
Dr. John Ioannidis, an oft quoted (google has him in the top 100 most cited experts) Professor at Stanford University has “.. mapped 235 biases across science. And maybe the biggest cluster is biases that are trying to generate significant, spectacular, fascinating, extraordinary results..... Claims for significance tend to be exaggerated.”



https://apple.news/AvmOa3qD1QAqCpmZimGU0Dw

Professor Ioannidis identifies that the mortality rate for the Covid 19 virus is lower than experts cite and may be on par with seasonal flu.






Edited by Peter McKenna (04/27/20 12:29 AM)
_________________________
Peter McKenna

Top
#169833 - 05/06/20 08:48 AM Re: COVID-19 claims and mutually exclusive arguments [Re: jryan]
zaiyamariya Offline
member


Registered: 03/07/20
Posts: 15
Loc: AL
I cannot believe this report about the COVID 19 that you have stated here. COVID-19 virus is a far more virulent and deadly virus than any. Best CBD Oil for Sleep So be careful and always use a face mask and hand sanitizer. BE safe in your home.
Top
#169915 - 05/22/20 07:08 AM Re: COVID-19 claims and mutually exclusive arguments [Re: jryan]
Ryan_B_Abraham Offline
member


Registered: 05/07/20
Posts: 7
Loc: CA
Thanks for sharing the information for us. The COVID-19 virus is an infectious disease caused by a newly discovered coronavirus. It is an infectious disease that primarily affects the lungs. So be careful. cbd oil for anxiety Stay home and stay safe.
Top
#169919 - 05/22/20 10:19 PM Re: COVID-19 claims and mutually exclusive arguments [Re: Ryan_B_Abraham]
jvs Offline
enthusiast


Registered: 10/26/12
Posts: 97
Loc: Ohio
These scenarios are reductive. There is a lot we don't know about COVID, and even a decent amount we don't know about the flu.

Comparing CFR for influenza to IFR for COVID is not an apples to apples comparison. CFR for seasonal influenza is probably something like .1, and IFR for influenza is probably something like .02-.05. Flu deaths are estimated by the CDC using excess death data. If you use the same methodology to estimate COVID deaths to date, you get an estimate in the 110-125k range.

Modeling the effectiveness of the federal response is difficult because there are so many factors that play into what you would expect to see in different scenarios. Population density, responses by the various state and local government agencies, changes in social behavior and environmental differences each play a factor. It's difficult to have a fair baseline. The best comparisons are going to be other first world countries with similar weather & population density, but these factors are so different within different regions of the US that trying to compare our national results to another country is of limited use.

The best guesses I have at this time is that this virus is more deadly (probable CFR in the .3-1.0 range vs. .1 for seasonal influenza [though this varies]) and more contagious (R0 of 2-6 vs ~1.3 for seasonal influenza).

Effectiveness of the national response thusfar to COVID is uncertain, but probably moderate. It is difficult to determine what the true infection rate was/is without widespread serology testing, and it is likely to have very substantial regional variation as a result of both differing regional responses (preventative measures were mostly regional, not national), and other factors mentioned above (population density, weather, social norms etc.).

Probably the fairest way to determine how well countries are responding to COVID overall is to compare per capita death rates. The US fares...OK here. Better than most of Western Europe, but Western Europe arguably had less time to prepare. Time to prepare and how far along the curve each country is makes even these comparisons perilous, and of limited use, especially when the data from some countries (China, Russia, etc.) is not dependable.

One specific thing I will point out is that the US has done a poor job of protecting the most vulnerable populations. Something like 30-40% of the reported deaths have come from nursing homes/assisted living facilities, including an astounding 70% here in Ohio where I live.

jvs

Top
Page 1 of 1 1


Hop to:

Generated in 0.027 seconds in which 0.004 seconds were spent on a total of 13 queries. Zlib compression disabled.

Home    Books    Curtis on Publishing   Previews    Bio    Bibliography    Snapshots     Foreign News    Reader's Forum    Art