Death projections are down from 90k to 80k now to 60k

[prometeus]

The thing is, people really like the man.

Yes, some do and honestly, after stepping in dog poop, I wouldn't wipe my shoes with them.

He is a charismatic figure

Only to the low intellect, uneducated that he so loves, because they truly lack what it takes to see who he really is. An asshole will always like another asshole, because the other one is just lie (s)he.

and American liberals recognize the danger in that.

Not only the liberals, but anyone who looks at the situation with a bit of objectivity.

But -- and this is where I'm probably going to lose you

Its not about loosing or gaining me or anyone. It is about all of us looking in the mirror in the morning and not saying 'WTF am I becoming?'

Trump is not an authoritarian.

Of course he is. That is ALL he is.

He has declined to wield offered power on multiple occasions, now.

Humor me, example?

 

[apdst]

I hope there's no depression. I hope we rebound quickly. But I intend to use this data to make the anti-statist case over and over and over again until the liberals' heads explode. I used to be an ally of liberal causes. Now I fear their authoritarian reflexes. I wonder how many people out there are seeing things my way?

I don't know how fast the rebound will be, but there will be a rebound and the recovery will at least be steady.

 

[apdst]

Should we have sacrificed these people to the god of capitalism?

Are we going to nuke the economy every flu season?

 

[AJG]

Complete BS. Making bad predictions with little or no information is not "literally saving lives," it is in fact putting more lives at risk. The media ran with these completely bogus claims about how millions of people were going to die, creating a nation-wide panic that has already cost us more than $2 trillion dollars and tens of millions of jobs. Back in January, when they had very little information about COVID-19, they were making wild and completely irrational prediction without any reliable information that 2.2 million Americans would die. So the media ran with the story, sensationalized it, and did their level best to incite as much panic as possible to the point where everyone felt compelled to completely clean out all the grocery stores across the nation.

Had they treated COVID-19 like the normal annual influenza virus that we know it to be, there would never have been any panic. There would have been no "social distancing" and no lost jobs. Just like during the flu season of 2017-2018 when 61,000 Americans died, 810,000 were hospitalized, and 21,000,000 sought medical attention due to flu related symptoms. Yet there was no panic in 2017-2018 and we certainly didn't shut down the entire nation out of sheer terror.

You are celebrating the fact that they completely blew their original estimates from the very beginning, created a panic that cost millions of people their jobs, and are just now, 3 months after the fact, posting more realistic figures. It has absolutely nothing to do with the irrational panic induced behavior you refer to as "social distancing."

Suppose the new model is right and 60,000 people die in the US. What do you think the numbers would have looked like if we treated this like a normal flu season? Many hospitals are reportedly being overwhelmed and lack proper PPE. Do you believe that's something that usually happens in a normal flu season?

 

[BlueTex]

Suppose the new model is right and 60,000 people die in the US. What do you think the numbers would have looked like if we treated this like a normal flu season? Many hospitals are reportedly being overwhelmed and lack proper PPE. Do you believe that's something that usually happens in a normal flu season?

Keeping in mind that the model assumes Level 4 social distancing (stay-at-home) through May 30th and is not projecting the number of deaths beyond August 4th.

 

[What if...?]

Yep, and expect to see much more of it. As the "official" 15 day shutdown, now the "official" 45 day shutdown, is extended until COVID-19 cases 'reach a manageable level' - of course, never stating what that level (number or percentage of increase/decrease?) is.

Yet another "war" with no clearly defined exit strategy. What could possibly go wrong?

Worst case it's as "over" as it's going to be in a year or so. We'll have a vaccine by then with any luck.

So not "endless".

 

[ttwtt78640]

Worst case it's as "over" as it's going to be in a year or so. We'll have a vaccine by then with any luck.

So not "endless".

It will be "endless" (as in permanently closed) for many business owners long before that.

 

[What if...?]

Are we going to nuke the economy every flu season?

Of course not.

We have vaccines and herd immunity to influenzas.

And it still kills thousands every year.

Nobody has immunity to this virus. That's what "novel" means.

You just think it has something to do with reading, apparently.

 

[What if...?]

It will be "endless" (as in permanently closed) for many business owners long before that.

The fault for that lies in our anemic initial response.

Here's an interesting article I found that compares our response and South Korea's, who had their first confirmed case the same day:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAMegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw1m2GtQAP73Gj0DSXDGVWWu

They took it seriously from the start.

We did not.

 

[maxparrish]

Great news!

Within a week, US death projections from one of the models used widely (incl by White House) changed from 90k down to 80k and now to 60k.

Earlier range was 40k-180k. New range is 30k-120k.

This shows that stay-at-home measures, now applied to 97% of population, are working.

One explanation I read is that original models assumed 50% of people complied with stay-at-home orders and social distancing whereas in truth 90% do.

Let's keep pushing the projections down! Stay home and away from other people! You are literally saving lives when you do!

After reading your op I've decide that there must be a lucrative cottage industry in alarmist flip-flop rationalizing. Not 24 hours ago, when I posted that the pandemic would turn out no worse than a season of really bad flu, every kitchen sink within reach was tossed my way...so many it was impossible to answer them all.

None the less, the alarmists on the left echo'd the same thing: "it's all bunk, we don't know how many more have really died, you can't trust models, we don't know how many people are truly infected, the IHME model assumes 'full compliance' and we know many states are refusing to do that, 538 says the consensus is 250,000 something, yada...yada...yada".

NOW someone attempts to make lemonade out of a lemon, claiming not only that there has been full social distancing BUT that it was "super full distancing" so THAT explains why the IHME model turned to be correct...it's no longer unreliable, undercounted, bunk but testimony to the wisdom of our SD policies.

LOL... apparently hutzpah is a far more common than shame, and as some of the critics my charts beat a hasty retreat, it's worth revisiting and now adding to the errors of their partisanship.

First, the update note at the IHME DO NOT even discuss, let alone claim, that the revision downward is due to EXTRA social distancing. Furthermore it runs counter to the long-standing, left-wing, criticism that we were/are failing and not doing enough. Clearly somebody has some shame-faced explaining to do.

Second, at this time it is IMPOSSIBLE to know how effective formal state mandated social distancing is or how much credit should be given to it causing the failure of alarmist predictions. Predictions that were fundamentally histrionic a month ago were most likely were unsound and NEVER realistic.

Third, it is unknown what each kind of social distancing contributes (if any) to reduced numbers. For example, the Imperial college report said that mass gatherings of a few hours were not a problem, and also maintained that school closures only had marginal effects on mitigating virus spread.

Third, much is still unknown about this virus. We don't know it's natural infection rate (only a range of possibilities), it's natural mortality rate, or how much other factors affect it's expression; climate, UV exposure, population density, etc. However, what is clear is that population density is a critical element in its spread and perhaps lethality... the hot spots of NY and NJ suggest as much.

Four, it is also curious that OTHER urban areas are not virulent 'hot spots' : one hear's nothing about Chicago, Los Angles, Dallas, Denver, etc. It may well be that it takes very high population concentration's to maintain an epidemic - Louisiana, for example, was feared to become unmanageable but in spite of some stubborn resistance to formal and full SD measures, they already turned the corner and hospital capacity is not a concern.

Five, it is also impossible to know whether formal SD policy made a difference compared to what people do anyway, voluntarily. It may well be that formal shutdowns accomplished much less than people, on their own using common sense, made in selectively choosing when and how to expose themselves (which, by the way, is what the OP implies).

In sum, there is no reason to maintain that only formal, government mandated social distancing could or even did lower the last two iterations of the IHME forecast, anymore than there is a reason to assume that government subsidies and limits on crop production save us from starvation.

But you could have tracked the data, without knowing the mechanisms, to predict when and how this will end - in other words, look at the charts.

 

[ttwtt78640]

The fault for that lies in our anemic initial response.

Here's an interesting article I found that compares our response and South Korea's, who had their first confirmed case the same day:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAMegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw1m2GtQAP73Gj0DSXDGVWWu

They took it seriously from the start.

We did not.

That is true, but Trump (the executive) can only do what the legislature funds. I doubt that the SK legislature was in the midst of trying to remove their chief executive. I'm not saying that Trump is making wise decisions, but having the MSM constantly saying whatever he does is wrong and congress trying to pass all manner of emergency pork it has become a mess for sure.

I have yet to figure out why giving my girlfriend and I $1,200 each is part of a solid plan of action to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, but we are not about to turn down "free" money.

 

[Deuce]

Presenting a false choice between only doing what was done and doing nothing at all is ridiculous.

Quarantine is pretty close to an all-or-nothing prospect. Any measures that would be substantively effective at flattening the curve were inevitably going to shutter a lot of businesses. You can't pack movie theaters and sports arenas and airliners and expect to appreciably slow the virus.

Feel free to explain in great detail the action you would have proposed that also doesn't empty businesses.

 

[Deuce]

That is true, but Trump (the executive) can only do what the legislature funds. I doubt that the SK legislature was in the midst of trying to remove their chief executive. I'm not saying that Trump is making wise decisions, but having the MSM constantly saying whatever he does is wrong and congress trying to pass all manner of emergency pork it has become a mess for sure.

I have yet to figure out why giving my girlfriend and I $1,200 each is part of a solid plan of action to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, but we are not about to turn down "free" money.

Nobody said the $1200 cures a virus. The money is so you can keep feeding yourself. Must be nice, to not understand what living paycheck to paycheck is like.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Quarantine is pretty close to an all-or-nothing prospect. Any measures that would be substantively effective at flattening the curve were inevitably going to shutter a lot of businesses. You can't pack movie theaters and sports arenas and airliners and expect to contain the virus.

Feel free to explain in great detail the action you would have proposed that also doesn't empty businesses.

Testing is absolutely essential to treating those who are contagious differently from those who are not. We hear "experts" yammer on about "data driven" plans of action, yet that they lack the necessary data. Quarantine of those identified as infected makes more sense than a mostly voluntary "stay at home" (as much as you wish?) semi-quarantine of everyone. When your only tool is a hammer, then you must address all problems as if they were nails.

 

[bearpoker]

You guys know you only get one shot at this, right? If the numbers are much lower than early projections -- and they certainly are going to be much, much lower -- then you've lost the narrative. You can scream "it worked!" all you want, but people feeling the residual economic effects are going to be unconvinced.

It's called crying wolf.

My prediction: There will never be another lockdown no matter how bad the next virus is.

If that's true, and it's possible if Trump or another brain dead Republican is in charge, then the death count will be off the charts.

 

[bearpoker]

I hope there's no depression. I hope we rebound quickly. But I intend to use this data to make the anti-statist case over and over and over again until the liberals' heads explode. I used to be an ally of liberal causes. Now I fear their authoritarian reflexes. I wonder how many people out there are seeing things my way?

Don't hold your breath. Nobodies head is going to explode over such inept arguments. Trump's given us a lot of practice in that sort of thing.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Nobody said the $1200 cures a virus. The money is so you can keep feeding yourself. Must be nice, to not understand what living paycheck to paycheck is like.

We are getting Social Security retirement and living on about $33K/year. A much more intelligent and targeted individual worker relief payment plan would have been to use the difference in FICA (payroll tax) contributions prior to the pandemic and those made after the pandemic - sending out the calculated (if negative) difference in income (or some percentage of it up to $X/month) to those actaully suffering a "pandemic related" loss of wage/salary income.

The idea that what we did was all that could have been done, and that the only alternative was have done nothing, is ridiculous.

 

[Deuce]

Testing is absolutely essential to treating those who are contagious differently from those who are not. We hear "experts" yammer on about "data driven" plans of action, yet that they lack the necessary data. Quarantine of those identified as infected makes more sense than a mostly voluntary "stay at home" (as much as you wish?) semi-quarantine of everyone. When your only tool is a hammer, then you must address all problems as if they were nails.

You've offered a solution that requires data we don't have. Fantastic. Problem solved.

Yeah, I wish we'd had proactive testing available three months ago. That would have been fantastic. I fly planes for a living. I should be tested every week. But I can't get tested even once without showing serious symptoms. How do I know? Because I tried. One of my copilots got a fever, heachache, and cough after our trip. He couldn't get tested because his symptoms were mild. I couldn't get tested because he wasn't a confirmed case. Good luck, passengers!

If your solutions are going to be based off things we don't have, why not just give every person in America PPE? Couple boxes each of N95 masks and latex gloves, delivered each week, to every single person.

 

[Mongidig]

Cool, only twenty 9/11’s.

It's a heck of a lot better than 700 9/11's.

 

[Deuce]

We are getting Social Security retirement and living on about $33K/year. A much more intelligent and targeted individual worker relief payment plan would have been to use the difference in FICA (payroll tax) contributions prior to the pandemic and those made after the pandemic - sending out the calculated (if negative) difference in income (or some percentage of it up to $X/month) to those actaully suffering a "pandemic related" loss of wage/salary income.

The idea that waht we did was all that could have been done, and that the only alternative was have done nothing, is ridiculous.

This would seem to not give anyone a dime until the end of the quarter.

I never claimed this $1200 "stimulus check" was the only way to handle the economic support people need. In fact, I have been highly critical of the administration focusing on giving money to corporations instead of people.

 

[PirateMk1]

Agreed to all.

And bingo, to the bolded.

Without accurate data, we're flying blind. That contributed greatly to our mess. We need to be data-driven in both policy & analysis.

Next time around, we need a crack epidemic-pandemic response team that can evaluate dangers from afar, and react quickly with localized pinpointed testing, tracing, and mitigation.

We need a team of effective snipers, so we don't have to use blanket nukes.

It doesn't work like that, you need widespread frequent testing, so you know WHERE to snipe. That is what gives you the knowledge you need. We need the reagents to make the tests. Thats the bottom line. We need the capability to make those test supplies here in the states. Biological testing relies on chemical reaction, we have to be able to produce the necessary chemicals in mass. We dont have that capability.

 

[Visbek]

I did understand exactly what they were saying, and the 2.2 million US deaths they predicted was based upon extremely little or no information.

No, it wasn't. Again: It was based on past experience with similar diseases, and a reasonably accurate assumption about replication rates. That estimate was also published on 3/16, by which time we had some definite (though certainly not comprehensive) information about the virus.

Your ignorance is an indicator of the limits of your knowledge, and does accurately describe the level of knowledge and experience of the virologists, epidemiologists, medical researchers and others who have spent years working on these issues.

No, it is not. COVID-19 is actually milder than prior cases of influenza, as the CDC clearly indicates.

No, no, no. The CDC most certainly does NOT say that. You're just ignoring what the CDC says, and even the data you're presenting.

For example, according to that chart, the flu usually causes 500 deaths per week; in a bad flu season, it's 1600 per week. In the last 7 days, COVID-19 killed over 8,000 people.

Between 3/17 and 3/24 = 694 deaths
Between 3/25 and 3/31 = 3,273 deaths
Between 4/1 and 4/7 = 8,788 deaths

(I don't suppose you see a pattern...?)

Those are likely undercounts, too, as people who die at home without a test aren't classified as dying from COVID-19.

Yesterday, 1900 people died from COVID-19. And we're not at the peak yet.

Only available the year after the virus hits. Next year there will be a COVID-19 vaccination available.

Incorrect. We make a flu vaccine every year. And the fact that we won't have a vaccine for COVID-19 for at least a year is a major reason for why we need to take action.

That is a deliberate lie by the leftist media for the sole purpose to incite panic and terror.

:roll:

Wow. You showed me by presenting no evidence whatsoever.

And they are just as capable of handling COVID-19, since it is no different and even milder than influenza epidemics of the past.

What are you, new? Hospitals in Italy were completely overwhelmed, and that drove up the mortality rate. Hospitals in New York, Louisiana and other areas are barely hanging on, and that's with doing everything they can to maximize hospital space for COVID-19 patients, reusing PPE only intended for single use, even using experimental equipment to put 2 people on 1 ventilator.

How many people have to die before you take this seriously?

 

[ttwtt78640]

You've offered a solution that requires data we don't have. Fantastic. Problem solved.

Yeah, I wish we'd had proactive testing available three months ago. That would have been fantastic. I fly planes for a living. I should be tested every week. But I can't get tested even once without showing serious symptoms. How do I know? Because I tried. One of my copilots got a fever, heachache, and cough after our trip. He couldn't get tested because his symptoms were mild. I couldn't get tested because he wasn't a confirmed case. Good luck, passengers!

If your solutions are going to be based off things we don't have, why not just give every person in America PPE? Couple boxes each of N95 masks and latex gloves, delivered each week, to every single person.

I agree with you. The choice at*the federal level was whether to concentrate on treating ever increasing COVID-19 casualties or trying to reduce them by taking the most effective measures to do so. As you noted, testing was not considered as urgent as finding and moving around PPE and other medical care supplies - a function that*could have been done without nearly as much federal involvement. The business shutdown, stay at home and "social distancing" unfunded mandates were all done at the state and local level and required no federal involvement.

 

[bearpoker]

Nope, that assumes that the only two choices available were do exactly what we did or to have done nothing at all. That sort of "logic" is often used to "defend" crap like the GND - pass it in total immediately or many, many millions will surely die.

There is a 3rd alternative, which is early and aggressive testing. Finding the contacts of all who tested positive and tracing the contacts of all those etc. That's what South Korea did and that's how they avoided a shutdown. Unfortunately, the window for that has passed since the Federal Government didn't act. Now we are left with lock downs as the only viable alternative to doing nothing. If you know of an additional alternative, I'd love to hear it.

 

[PirateMk1]

I don't know how fast the rebound will be, but there will be a rebound and the recovery will at least be steady.

I got a feeling there is going to be a partisan fight on fast we go back to work. I am hearing 18 months from the likes of Ezekiel Emanuel. No way in hell we do that without a knock down drag out fight.