Author Topic: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka  (Read 11454 times)

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1303
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #100 on: March 03, 2020, 07:53:39 PM »

Also, there are 93,123 confirmed cases (as of this minute). I have a hard time buying the "not enough data" argument. Will we get better data? Sure. Will we refine our understanding of the situation? Absolutely. But "not enough data" when we have 93K cases of a disease that has been spreading for over two months is an absurd argument.

Confirmed cases are coming primarily from those going to get treatment and then tested.  Hence the data is biased towards those already in poor condition.  Comprehensive data will need to include all of those infected, including those who don't get treatment -- which could be many magnitudes more.  This is why it's very hard to know what the mortality rate is.  It's very likely that this virus has been in populations for many months without being detected.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2020, 07:56:36 PM by HBFIRE »

American GenX

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #101 on: March 03, 2020, 08:11:41 PM »
It's very likely that this virus has been in populations for many months without being detected.

What populations?  Do you have any evidence of this?  I haven't heard this from any of the various health authorities/experts that have spoken on the matter.  How can you say it's very likely when there is no evidence to support that?

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1303
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #102 on: March 03, 2020, 08:16:40 PM »
It's very likely that this virus has been in populations for many months without being detected.

What populations?  Do you have any evidence of this?  I haven't heard this from any of the various health authorities/experts that have spoken on the matter.  How can you say it's very likely when there is no evidence to support that?

Will try to find the source, this was commentary from an immunologist speaking about it.

PDXTabs

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2503
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Portland, OR, USA
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #103 on: March 03, 2020, 09:14:13 PM »
Confirmed cases are coming primarily from those going to get treatment and then tested.

South Korea has run 109,591 people to confirm 5,328 cases. I'm not sure I buy your argument.

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1303
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #104 on: March 03, 2020, 09:52:34 PM »

South Korea has run 109,591 people to confirm 5,328 cases. I'm not sure I buy your argument.

That's good, and as more testing is done the data will reach a statistical confidence interval.  Right now there is still heavy statistical bias towards testing being done on those hospitalized.

Interestingly, in China, outside of Wuhan — the city at the epicenter of the outbreak, the death rate is ~ 0.7%. Similarly, a study released by China's Center for Disease Control last month, found that if you factor out all the data from Hubei province, where Wuhan is located, the fatality rate in the rest of China drops to 0.4%.

"Abstract: From 29 January to 15 February 2020, a total of 565 Japanese citizens were evacuated from Wuhan, China on three chartered flights. All passengers were screened upon arrival in Japan for symptoms consistent with novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infection and tested for presence of the virus. Assuming that the mean detection window of the virus can be informed by the mean serial interval (estimated at 7.5 days), the ascertainment rate of infection was estimated at 9.2% (95% confidence interval: 5.0, 20.0). This indicates that the incidence of infection in Wuhan can be estimated at 20,767 infected individuals, including those with asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic infections. The infection fatality risk (IFR)—the actual risk of death among all infected individuals—is therefore 0.3% to 0.6%, which may be comparable to Asian influenza pandemic of 1957–1958."

All of this is to say, the actual mortality rate is very hard to determine this early on.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2020, 10:04:44 PM by HBFIRE »

American GenX

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #105 on: March 03, 2020, 10:05:55 PM »
I saw this posted a while ago about South Korea.

As of March 3, they have tested 125,851 with 4,812 confirmed cases. Of the 4,812 confirmed, 34 discharged, 4750 isolated and 28 deceased.

So, if you look at the closed cases to see how they turned out, you have a total of  (34+28) = 62.

So you have 28 of those 62 being deceased.  That's a fatality rate of 45% among closed cases.

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1303
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #106 on: March 03, 2020, 10:12:30 PM »

So you have 8 of those 62 being deceased.  That's a fatality rate of 45% among closed cases.

Well the US has that beat.  9 deaths and only 8 recoveries, for a fatality rate of  53%!  This goes to show how data can be misinterpreted.

v8rx7guy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2146
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Bellingham, WA
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #107 on: March 03, 2020, 10:22:20 PM »
It's very likely that this virus has been in populations for many months without being detected.

What populations?  Do you have any evidence of this?  I haven't heard this from any of the various health authorities/experts that have spoken on the matter.  How can you say it's very likely when there is no evidence to support that?

Will try to find the source, this was commentary from an immunologist speaking about it.

In thinking you're referring to the articles saying that it may have been undetected in WA for 6 weeks:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/coronavirus-may-have-spread-undetected-for-weeks-in-washington-state-which-reported-first-two-deaths-in-us/ar-BB10BIr0

American GenX

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #108 on: March 03, 2020, 11:11:02 PM »

So you have 8 of those 62 being deceased.  That's a fatality rate of 45% among closed cases.

Well the US has that beat.  9 deaths and only 8 recoveries, for a fatality rate of  53%!  This goes to show how data can be misinterpreted.

Has the U.S. tested 125,851 people?  I think the data set in the U.S. is still too small.   It's still too early in South Korea also as far as closed cases, but I specifically UNDERLINED "closed cases" to make it clear what I was referring to.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #109 on: March 04, 2020, 02:16:40 AM »
There are too many variables, I think.

Comparisons against different populations are difficult.  Are infection rates among Japanese in Wuhan different from infection rates for Chinese in Wuhan?  Are we being told the truth about deaths in Wuhan?  (Citizen journalists with evidence of mortality in Wuhan have been "disappeared" by Chinese authorities.)  Is the population on the Diamond Princess generally in better health or older than a general population, or some combination of both?

The biggest variable of all to me is the availability of advanced hospital treatment.  A certain percentage of cases have serious illness from covid19: I've seen estimates of 20%, with a smaller percentage, perhaps 4%, needing intensive care and ventilation. If those 20% don't get hospital care, and if intensive care and ventilation are unavailable to all who could benefit from it, then death rates will be higher and that's difficult to account for in the statistics.  We do know that some young and healthy people die even with advanced hospital treatment, as with the whistleblowing ophthalmologist in Wuhan.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3684
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #110 on: March 05, 2020, 08:23:12 AM »
A counterpoint to people who prefer to get sick early, and have cushy hospital beds.

During the time of the Spanish flu, hospitals were at capacity.  The best they could do is put people outside in the open air, and keep them warm with heated up rocks.  So far sounds like you'd rather be inside...
...but survival rates were higher *outside*.

I don't think the exact reason was studied / discovered.  I'm guessing / read that fresh air and sunlight could have been factors in the improved survival rates.

Malcat

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5522
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #111 on: March 05, 2020, 08:51:49 AM »
A counterpoint to people who prefer to get sick early, and have cushy hospital beds.

During the time of the Spanish flu, hospitals were at capacity.  The best they could do is put people outside in the open air, and keep them warm with heated up rocks.  So far sounds like you'd rather be inside...
...but survival rates were higher *outside*.

I don't think the exact reason was studied / discovered.  I'm guessing / read that fresh air and sunlight could have been factors in the improved survival rates.

Or....perhaps they put the milder cases who needed less active care outside? That's what I would do as a healthcare professional.

effigy98

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 486
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #112 on: March 05, 2020, 09:44:36 AM »
Well all tech employees told to stay home on the west coast. That is like half our workforce. Not all of us can remote in, the infrastructure does not handle it. That cannot be good for the economy.

PDXTabs

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2503
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Portland, OR, USA
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #113 on: March 05, 2020, 10:15:31 AM »
Well all tech employees told to stay home on the west coast. That is like half our workforce. Not all of us can remote in, the infrastructure does not handle it. That cannot be good for the economy.

Slightly off topic, but my company doesn't have this problem because we built up all the infrastructure to allow (almost) everyone to work remotely. The obvious exceptions being people who have to ship physical goods, or test complex setups in a lab. But in terms of IT infrastructure we are 100% good to go.

erutio

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 692
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #114 on: March 05, 2020, 10:45:01 AM »
I saw this posted a while ago about South Korea.

As of March 3, they have tested 125,851 with 4,812 confirmed cases. Of the 4,812 confirmed, 34 discharged, 4750 isolated and 28 deceased.

So, if you look at the closed cases to see how they turned out, you have a total of  (34+28) = 62.

So you have 28 of those 62 being deceased.  That's a fatality rate of 45% among closed cases.

You've used this type of math multiple times already.  It is straight up the wrong way to do statistics.

LAGuy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 318
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Los Angeles
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #115 on: March 05, 2020, 03:09:38 PM »
A counterpoint to people who prefer to get sick early, and have cushy hospital beds.

During the time of the Spanish flu, hospitals were at capacity.  The best they could do is put people outside in the open air, and keep them warm with heated up rocks.  So far sounds like you'd rather be inside...
...but survival rates were higher *outside*.

I don't think the exact reason was studied / discovered.  I'm guessing / read that fresh air and sunlight could have been factors in the improved survival rates.

More likely they just brought the most serious cases inside.

Telecaster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2465
  • Location: Seattle, WA
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #116 on: March 05, 2020, 03:12:07 PM »
Well all tech employees told to stay home on the west coast. That is like half our workforce. Not all of us can remote in, the infrastructure does not handle it. That cannot be good for the economy.

On the bright side, traffic in Seattle is a breeze. 

American GenX

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #117 on: March 05, 2020, 03:39:29 PM »
I saw this posted a while ago about South Korea.

As of March 3, they have tested 125,851 with 4,812 confirmed cases. Of the 4,812 confirmed, 34 discharged, 4750 isolated and 28 deceased.

So, if you look at the closed cases to see how they turned out, you have a total of  (34+28) = 62.

So you have 28 of those 62 being deceased.  That's a fatality rate of 45% among closed cases.

You've used this type of math multiple times already.  It is straight up the wrong way to do statistics.

I disagree, but maybe you just skimmed over my post without realizing what I was trying to determine.  That was simply a calculation at a single point in time with a very limited data set in calculating fatalities as a percentage of all closed cases, and I underlined "among closed cases" in my previous post to clarify.  The math is exactly correct for determining that calculation.   But that was a couple days ago, and the number of recoveries is up more than the additional deaths, so the percentage calculated in the earlier post would be lower if calculated today.  There are many active cases, but COVID-19 can take weeks before it results in death, so it will be a while before we have statistically meaningful numbers.  I posted only out of interest of how those figures were early on, at that point in time, not to be published in any medical papers or to draw final conclusions from.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2020, 03:42:37 PM by American GenX »

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3684
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #118 on: March 05, 2020, 06:32:59 PM »
...
So you have 28 of those 62 being deceased.  That's a fatality rate of 45% among closed cases.
Are you sure those involve the same time frame?

Imagine two patients in ICU, and one dies.  The other one isn't healthy the same day.  They have to recover, and then there's time the hospital waits to ensure they're recovered, and then some number of tests in a row before declaring them to be healthy again.

It's like if you divide deaths by total cases.  Some of the cases are new as of today, while patients who died have typically been fighting the virus for weeks.  Especially when dealing with exponential growth, shifting the time frame can make a huge difference (even if unintentional - it's tricky).

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1303
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #119 on: March 05, 2020, 07:02:33 PM »

So you have 28 of those 62 being deceased.  That's a fatality rate of 45% among closed cases.
Are you sure those involve the same time frame?


It's a totally useless statistic, I'm not even sure what the reason is to cite it other than to cause panic.

Essentially what happened is that when South Korea first started seeing the virus, it had already been in the population for a couple weeks (a high % of cases are asymptomatic, as much as 50% per current data). Once a patient reached a very poor state of health and was hospitalized, they would be tested and "confirmed".  Of these confirmed cases, a relatively high percentage perish.  So what has happened is that the data is initially biased towards these types of cases until more data comes in and more testing is done.  It's still very early in S Korea, and the stat this person cited is changing by drastic amounts by the day.  Again, it's not a data point worth citing and the only motive would be to make the situation seem scarier than it really is.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2020, 07:06:16 PM by HBFIRE »

American GenX

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #120 on: March 05, 2020, 07:03:20 PM »
...
So you have 28 of those 62 being deceased.  That's a fatality rate of 45% among closed cases.
Are you sure those involve the same time frame?


Yes, that would have been from the time the outbreak began in SK until the time those numbers were released.  But, it's too small of a sample within too small of time frame to be very meaningful, so I'm watching how these figures change over time.  The percentage has dropped at this point from those earlier figures, but it's still a high percentage at this point.

Quote
It's like if you divide deaths by total cases.  Some of the cases are new as of today, while patients who died have typically been fighting the virus for weeks.  Especially when dealing with exponential growth, shifting the time frame can make a huge difference (even if unintentional - it's tricky).

Yes, it would make a huge difference if you divided by total cases (including active cases), because it can take weeks to die, so it takes a lot longer for that to play out, and if you divide by total cases, you are essentially saying that anyone who is among the many active cases is going to live, which we know isn't true because some of them will die, so we need to wait until those cases are closed as recovered or deceased to really know where they fit in the calculation, so they should be excluded for now.  That's why I think any calculation dividing by total cases is misleading - we don't know their fate yet.  Time will tell.

American GenX

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #121 on: March 05, 2020, 07:12:41 PM »
I saw this posted a while ago about South Korea.

As of March 3, they have tested 125,851 with 4,812 confirmed cases. Of the 4,812 confirmed, 34 discharged, 4750 isolated and 28 deceased.

So, if you look at the closed cases to see how they turned out, you have a total of  (34+28) = 62.

So you have 28 of those 62 being deceased.  That's a fatality rate of 45% among closed cases.

You've used this type of math multiple times already.  It is straight up the wrong way to do statistics.

I disagree, but maybe you just skimmed over my post without realizing what I was trying to determine.  That was simply a calculation at a single point in time with a very limited data set in calculating fatalities as a percentage of all closed cases, and I underlined "among closed cases" in my previous post to clarify.  The math is exactly correct for determining that calculation.   But that was a couple days ago, and the number of recoveries is up more than the additional deaths, so the percentage calculated in the earlier post would be lower if calculated today.  There are many active cases, but COVID-19 can take weeks before it results in death, so it will be a while before we have statistically meaningful numbers.  I posted only out of interest of how those figures were early on, at that point in time, not to be published in any medical papers or to draw final conclusions from.

As I stated above in the earlier post I made, recoveries are up more than deaths.

So, now there are 40 deaths and 135 recoveries.  That's an improvement to about 23%.  This doesn't surprise me at all, and I expect this SK figure to drop further as these cases play out, but not to the erroneously calculated 0.5% figure that was published elsewhere.

erutio

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 692
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #122 on: March 06, 2020, 09:06:42 AM »
Well all tech employees told to stay home on the west coast. That is like half our workforce. Not all of us can remote in, the infrastructure does not handle it. That cannot be good for the economy.

Aren't we the ones who usually advocate that WFH increases productivity?

maizefolk

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5470
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #123 on: March 06, 2020, 01:17:37 PM »
Well all tech employees told to stay home on the west coast. That is like half our workforce. Not all of us can remote in, the infrastructure does not handle it. That cannot be good for the economy.

Aren't we the ones who usually advocate that WFH increases productivity?

Long term I think WFH can maintain or increase productivity for a lot of jobs. Short term there is a learning curve, particularly if online services are overloaded and people don't have a good home office setup.

Looking at the economy as a whole, I bet WFH significantly decreases consumer demand. Less lunches out at the office, more making a sandwich in your own kitchen. Fewer impulse shopping trips or take out dinners on the drive home from work.*

*Make no mistake, that sounds like an amazing trade off of reduced economic activity for greater happiness and sustainability. But I think the economic hit would be real.

bthewalls

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 316
  • Location: ireland/northern ireland
  • gods own prototype....
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #124 on: March 06, 2020, 01:48:00 PM »
Just checked my vanguard VWRL (same as usa VTI?) value, its really not nice at the moment.

But for the long term 'buy and holders', these roller coasters make no real difference in the long term (c. 10 year period), unless a persons is about to retire and made the mistake of being equity heavy....

casual reference to the movie predator for anyone who needs a confidence boost https://youtu.be/b-Hgd5gHWbA

For anyone who is cash heavy, your day is near.....:-)  great time to commence regular purchases...?

Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2131
Re: Coronavirus ...bring it on mutha fucka
« Reply #125 on: March 06, 2020, 04:01:22 PM »

For anyone who is cash heavy, your day is near.....:-)  great time to commence regular purchases...?

Hmmm. Not just yet. Towards the end of the month into April as earnings (or lack thereof) are reported.