Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 04-30-2020, 04:09 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcenio View Post
Grim milestone. I see that the official US covid death toll has surpassed the official US Vietnam War death toll.
We're now past 63,500. Only about 5000 of those deaths were in March, so the U.S. has had more coronavirus deaths just this month alone than the entire American death toll for the Vietnam war.
  #202  
Old 04-30-2020, 11:43 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
What I saw today was even worse. That University of Minnesota expert's assumption that at least half the country will contract it over the next eighteen months looks more and more likely based on the stupid way people are behaving. There was a thread here a few weeks ago in which someone was castigated for wanting to have an outdoor BYOB barbecue among neighbors, with everyone sitting fifteen feet part. That looks like incredibly conservative, super responsible behavior compared to what I'm seeing.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #203  
Old 05-03-2020, 12:08 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Here's a model I think has lost its way: https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america

They just updated it yesterday, but they're showing total U.S. deaths leveling off at under 67,000.
Nope.

They now project a total of 72,433 deaths. By Wednesday, you ask. No, by August.
  #204  
Old 05-03-2020, 12:34 PM
casdave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,537
That model seems to be well off, and has been that way for quite some time. Death rates might decline a little but given that these relate to cases reported by up to three weeks ago I just cannot see it.Its off today by over 5000 and their projected total of 72k by August is not realistic as noted by RTfirefly

Seems to me that 90k by August is only a hope, and we have not yet seen the effects of protests, or incidents such as the funeral in NY where 1500 gathered to mark the event, nor the effects of the latest and future unlocks of states.

In the last 3 weeks the rate of reported infections has not declined - it is a steady progression, there would need to be a significant change to recovery rates for the number of deaths to decline - I doubt that the model has that sort of change built into it, and we do not yet know the full effect of the Remdesvir thing - it may be useful or it might just delay the inevitable.
  #205  
Old 05-03-2020, 01:07 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,978
1) Most of the models only function as projections under an assumption that current distancing measure are continued.

2) No question that after a good long period of performing well for the national picture at least the IHME model is now not doing so great. Thing though is that they had a way to lose. It is really hard to find any model with a decent track record. The linked graphic in the NYT piece informs some and here's a CDC page with some recent past model projections. Pretty much they've all been of little predictive value and I'd love to see some head to head performance evaluations. The range of the forecasts looking even four weeks out, knowing all that is now known, is outrageous.

PDF of state forecasts here.
  #206  
Old 05-03-2020, 02:19 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
1) Most of the models only function as projections under an assumption that current distancing measure are continued.
OK, but the IHME model has been updated since assorted governors had announced that their states were opening up this past Friday. If your model incorporates assumptions known to be false, sure, of course it's going to be off the mark, but that doesn't excuse it.
Quote:
2) No question that after a good long period of performing well for the national picture at least the IHME model is now not doing so great. Thing though is that they had a way to lose.
Tru dat, but having lost their way, they don't seem to be interested in finding it again.
Quote:
It is really hard to find any model with a decent track record.
Maybe so, but the others were so widely cited that this is the first I'm aware of them. The IHME model was the one everyone knew about.
  #207  
Old 05-03-2020, 02:53 PM
DMC is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
OK, but the IHME model has been updated since assorted governors had announced that their states were opening up this past Friday. If your model incorporates assumptions known to be false, sure, of course it's going to be off the mark, but that doesn't excuse it. Tru dat, but having lost their way, they don't seem to be interested in finding it again. Maybe so, but the others were so widely cited that this is the first I'm aware of them. The IHME model was the one everyone knew about.
As I've noted elsewhere, one of the biggest issues is that they assume a normal distribution, and there is an abundance of evidence that that is not a good model for this pandemic. Do any of these "Daily New Death" charts look like normal distributions:

Italy
Spain
Belgium
Germany
China
US

I could do this all day long.
  #208  
Old 05-03-2020, 04:21 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
... Maybe so, but the others were so widely cited that this is the first I'm aware of them. The IHME model was the one everyone knew about.
The Imperial College one on 3/16 was the first big news one that was widely cited, discussed here, and given how much you follow this and like the numbers I am honestly surprised you hadn't heard of it. It was projecting over 500K dead in the U.K. and over two million in the United States ... required was 5 months of heavy restrictions and then continued periods of intermittent restrictions for about two thirds of the time (believed to likely go on for at least 18 months). If 5 months of complete lock down was not possible they stated "that the alternative relatively short-term (3-month) mitigation policy option might reduce deaths seen in the epidemic by up to half" (i.e. still predicting a million deaths in the U.S., 250K in the U.K.). Original article - pdf. That changed to 7 to 20K in the U.K. by early April. Which given that it is currently 28K may have been a bit of an over correction. Revisions since. Others have gotten intermittent press.

My WAG is that IHME started to get more press because Fauci went with it, when they had adjusted up to a best case of 100 to 200K deaths in the U.S. early last month, and then stuck with them as they revised back down and down to lower than where they had started (now obviously revising back up again). But I think he went with it because it had been to that date the best performing of the lot.
  #209  
Old 05-04-2020, 05:27 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41,303
IHME adjusts their estimate a wee bit:
Quote:
134,475 COVID-19 deaths projected by August 4, 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
The Imperial College one on 3/16 was the first big news one that was widely cited, discussed here, and given how much you follow this and like the numbers I am honestly surprised you hadn't heard of it. It was projecting over 500K dead in the U.K. and over two million in the United States ...
It was well known back then that 'they' were saying potentially 2.2M people could die of the coronavirus here. I have no recollection of what source was attached to that figure. But for a couple weeks before I posted about it here, the only projection I'd seen anyone refer to was the IHME, and I'd seen it widely referred to.

Anyhow, it has been crazy low for weeks now, and they agree with that.

Last edited by RTFirefly; 05-04-2020 at 05:28 PM.
  #210  
Old 05-05-2020, 07:40 AM
Mr. Duality is offline
Luminary
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The High Plains
Posts: 1,634
400,000
__________________
America- Fuck yeah!
  #211  
Old 05-05-2020, 02:23 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
IHME adjusts their estimate a wee bit:
Yup. For anyone not tracking, they basically doubled their numbers over night.

It looks like they finally accepted a skew distribution to the epidemic rather than a nice normal distribution.

They still seem to think that hospital utilization and fatalities are in perfect phase, which is obviously wrong.

https://publius2point0.wordpress.com...me-prediction/

Last edited by Sage Rat; 05-05-2020 at 02:23 PM.
  #212  
Old 05-22-2020, 05:18 AM
casdave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,537
Well I reckon their revised number for August 4nd is also significantly wrong - its likely this will be realised by June 1st.

Add totals for June and July and you would imagine that approaching 200k is not unlikely especially given that the rate of infection is declining only very slowly and could quite easily rise during easing of restrictions.

That model has been consistently wrong, or maybe to be more charitable it is around one month to six weeks behind the reality.

Given that the predictive model has been so wrong I can't but help wonder if there is a political reason.

Imagine the presidential campaign running against a background of 200k plus deaths with a very distant hope of an end in sight. Unlocking certainly runs that risk and the pressures of the economic impact will only increase the pressure to unlock further.
  #213  
Old 05-22-2020, 05:45 AM
Der Trihs's Avatar
Der Trihs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 39,047
My guesstimate would be #5 from the OP; in the 300 to 500K range. The record so far seems to indicate that pessimism is likely to be the more accurate choice, here.
  #214  
Old 05-22-2020, 07:09 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by casdave View Post
Given that the predictive model has been so wrong I can't but help wonder if there is a political reason.
I'm sure a lot of Trump supporters think all the models that wildly over predicted infection rates were for political reasons too. None of the models have been very predictive and all have made major changes in their projections. Read the links DSeid provided above.

Last edited by CarnalK; 05-22-2020 at 07:14 AM.
  #215  
Old 05-22-2020, 01:33 PM
zimaane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: washington, dc
Posts: 1,224
Maybe it's not fair for me to jump in late, but I'll go with 200K - 300K. There are about 200 days left this year. Figuring an average of 1,000 deaths a day, that puts the year end total around 300,000.
  #216  
Old 05-23-2020, 07:46 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
DSeid, you haven't weighed in for a while. I never really understood exactly how your visualization of the trends in the death curve worked, but it seems like it was too optimistic. Is that fair?

For my part, it still looks like my prediction of right around 500K was too pessimistic--let's hope so anyway.

OTOH, if this model (which didn't get much national attention that I saw, surprisingly) released ten days ago is anywhere close to accurate, American deaths could be in the millions by next March (assuming Minnesota is not disproportionate to the rest of the country, and I don't know why it would be):


https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/0...-preventing-it
Quote:
The model, designed by researchers at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health and the state Department of Health, simulates the impact COVID-19 could have on the state, based on estimates about the disease. Its latest version was released Wednesday, after earlier versions in March and April.

Researchers used the model to simulate how many people might get infected, might need to be hospitalized and might die from the disease under various scenarios — from a quick reopening of the state to a stay-at-home order that stretches into the fall.

[A] scenario that mirrors Walz’s Wednesday announcement — in which Minnesota’s stay-at-home order ends on May 18, followed by a period of less-intense social distancing — projects that by the end of May, an estimated 1,441 people will have died of COVID-19 in Minnesota. By next March, that model predicts that just over 29,000 people will have died from the disease in the state.

They are projecting that more Minnesotans will die each day in July than have died to date! Hard to believe this could be remotely possible, but these are serious people making this prediction.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 05-23-2020 at 07:49 AM.
  #217  
Old 05-23-2020, 08:13 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,120
There is zero reason to put any faith whatsoever in a projection for next March.
  #218  
Old 05-23-2020, 09:06 AM
lobotomyboy63 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Secret World
Posts: 4,274
I was watching the numbers from Europe back in March or so. I think Spain had the worst ratio among "closed" cases---at one point about 55% got over it and 45% died IIRC. Today that number among resolved cases is 13%. Why?

I'm guessing that initially it tore through the groups that were at risk. I also remember reading about doctors in Italy being killed by it---probably a lack of PPE. Since then I've heard that putting patients on their stomach instead of their back may help. Would CPAP machines have been better than ventilators? We're learning as we go.

The OP asked how many would die from it. We're going to see lots more infections, I'm sure, and from what Fauci et al say we can't realistically expect a vaccine soon. It seems that we're losing a lower percentage, at least, and with have time to study it and pool what we know with other countries, maybe there's some hope.
  #219  
Old 05-23-2020, 10:21 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
DSeid, you haven't weighed in for a while. I never really understood exactly how your visualization of the trends in the death curve worked, but it seems like it was too optimistic. Is that fair? ...
At the time I had thought I was being a bit pessimistic ... but clearly it was wrong, an extremely significant undercall, as we are past it already. I am at least relieved that curves have been flattened enough (and responses to make capacity strong enough) that systems have not been overwhelmed. My current thinking though is increasingly fearful of what will be in the late Fall, especially in regions that have seen relatively few cases to date.

As to the model predictions ... there has been woefully little progress in pinning down the key inputs. No model has had a great track record, many have flipped around all over the place, and the only predictions that have not been way off have been for the very short term projections. I agree with CarnalK's lack of faith.
  #220  
Old 05-23-2020, 11:38 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,120
But who knows? If it turns out that the common cold coronaviruses do impart some immunity/resistance, maybe any resurgence of covid-19 will be blunted by arriving during cold season.
  #221  
Old 05-23-2020, 03:47 PM
Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 4,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locrian View Post
168,785 is my prediction.
Well, this was from March 8th. Using more napkin math and a hope for medication to combat it, I'm going with 320,255.

Last edited by Locrian; 05-23-2020 at 03:48 PM.
  #222  
Old 05-23-2020, 11:34 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
But that model, although it does project all the way to March, also has projections for June and July, not so far away. Those are what fascinate me. How are they projecting weeks of death rates this summer so high that everything up to now looks like miniscule foothills next to K2?
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #223  
Old 05-24-2020, 01:12 AM
Melbourne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
We're now past 63,500. Only about 5000 of those deaths were in March, so the U.S. has had more coronavirus deaths just this month alone than the entire American death toll for the Vietnam war.
And 3000 for 9/11. >Insert COVID conspiracy theory here<
  #224  
Old 05-24-2020, 07:01 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
But that model, although it does project all the way to March, also has projections for June and July, not so far away. Those are what fascinate me. How are they projecting weeks of death rates this summer so high that everything up to now looks like miniscule foothills next to K2?
Well, there's no way to reverse engineer their thinking. I mean, I presume they plugged some higher infection and mortality rates than some other projections but they'd basically have to explain it themselves.
  #225  
Old 05-24-2020, 07:28 AM
Pardel-Lux's Avatar
Pardel-Lux is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Berlin
Posts: 459
I believe the US just passed the official 100,000 deaths mark, in reality probably somewhat higher. The Economist has an article about past and present forecasts, unfortunately it is behind a paywall, but the part you can see are the graphs the article discusses, so you can figure something out for yourself. Have a look: https://www.economist.com/graphic-de...d-its-severity
We have the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), from Washington University, Youyang Gu, a "young graduate from the MIT" (cite from the article) "Mr. Gu's model uses machine-learning algorithms to instruct a SEIR model (S: susceptible, E: exposed, I: infected, R: recovered or dead) that has recently been more accurate than forecasts from more established outfits." Mr. Gu's model predicts the highest death rate from the three. And finally the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), the only one out of the three that has corrected the predictions downwards in the last weeks (see the color-coding for the different lines. Quite a clever graphic, actually).
My take: Very intelligent, well informed, experienced people can make very diverging predictions. But they correct them all the time; they are learning constantly and getting better!
I stick with my original prediction (no corretion, no learning, no getting better myself): one million until the end of the year, give or take 20%. Because of the second and third waves and because I am not an optimist about those things pertaining to collective social responsabily, good governance, common sense and love thy neighbour.
__________________
When I was younger I could remember anything, whether it had happened or not; but my faculties are decaying now and soon I shall be so I cannot remember any but the things that never happened. It is sad to go to pieces like this but we all have to do it.
Mark Twain
  #226  
Old 05-24-2020, 07:35 AM
Pardel-Lux's Avatar
Pardel-Lux is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Berlin
Posts: 459
I just saw that my first reponse was "number 7 it is", that is over one million. We shall see, I seem to be a wee tiny bit more optimistic than I was then.
__________________
When I was younger I could remember anything, whether it had happened or not; but my faculties are decaying now and soon I shall be so I cannot remember any but the things that never happened. It is sad to go to pieces like this but we all have to do it.
Mark Twain
  #227  
Old 05-24-2020, 07:42 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41,303
A month ago, I predicted between 150,000 and 300,000 deaths this year from the coronavirus. I see no reason to change that. If I had to choose one of the OP's ranges, I'd take 200K-300K. Given that even after a substantial decline in the covid-19 death rate, we're still losing >8000 people per week to the virus, I think it would take a miracle to keep the death toll as low as 150K, especially with things opening up again.
  #228  
Old 05-27-2020, 04:50 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
Pardel-Lux, thanks for tipping me off to the Youyang Gu model. Looking at his historical performance compared to other models and the actual death rate, it's pretty uncanny: https://covid19-projections.com/abou...al-performance
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 05-27-2020 at 04:51 PM.
  #229  
Old 05-27-2020, 05:08 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,350
I'm a wee bit less pessimistic now, maybe we'll skate by with 1/4 million. Maybe 1/2 million. But 1 million is still possible with that second wave that will likely happen.
  #230  
Old 05-27-2020, 09:05 PM
HoneyBadgerDC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Torrance Ca
Posts: 8,402
Sticking with my original estimate of 400,000, or 300,000 to 500,000. This number can be hugely effected by how successful we are at recognizing and protecting the vulnerable.
  #231  
Old 05-27-2020, 09:29 PM
Francis Vaughan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 5,319
A lot of the antibody testing coming in in the US seems to be placing the current number of already infected at between a low of abut 3% and a high of 5%. If you assumed herd immunity kicks in at 70% that would say you would be looking at over 2 million yet to die. But that makes all sorts of possibly unreasonable simplifying assumptions. It takes no account of age distributions, other demographics, and the like. But it isn't good.

This article on Medscape paints a not too happy picture of the outlook. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/931072
  #232  
Old 05-27-2020, 09:37 PM
HoneyBadgerDC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Torrance Ca
Posts: 8,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Vaughan View Post
A lot of the antibody testing coming in in the US seems to be placing the current number of already infected at between a low of abut 3% and a high of 5%. If you assumed herd immunity kicks in at 70% that would say you would be looking at over 2 million yet to die. But that makes all sorts of possibly unreasonable simplifying assumptions. It takes no account of age distributions, other demographics, and the like. But it isn't good.

This article on Medscape paints a not too happy picture of the outlook. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/931072
It could easily go to two million. I am banking an optimistic guess that we may improve care techniques and identifying and protecting the highest risk. I am honestly not all that optimistic we will succeed at that. I wonder if the U.S. population has the stomach to see deaths of 10,000 per day or more coming in day after day?
  #233  
Old 05-28-2020, 06:01 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Vaughan View Post
A lot of the antibody testing coming in in the US seems to be placing the current number of already infected at between a low of abut 3% and a high of 5%. If you assumed herd immunity kicks in at 70% that would say you would be looking at over 2 million yet to die.
We have no idea with this virus what herd immunity looks like (assuming that it applies here) - it's a new virus with a whole new range of effects and issues.

Still no clue as to where the final death toll will land.
  #234  
Old 05-28-2020, 07:23 AM
Francis Vaughan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 5,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
We have no idea with this virus what herd immunity looks like (assuming that it applies here) - it's a new virus with a whole new range of effects and issues.

Still no clue as to where the final death toll will land.
We still have some idea. I picked 70% simply because that is a convenient figure that has been bandied about. Covid-19 isn't as insanely infectious as say chickenpox. We have a good enough handle on R0 to be able to say that there will almost certainly be herd immunity. But it really doesn't matter. We are talking deaths. Herd immunity is just a scale factor in that context. No herd immunity is the same as saying 100%. Herd immunity is just a result of damping out of spread with enough resistant people in the community. 70% isn't unreasonable. It might be 90%. It can't be more than 100%. That just changes the back of the envelope calculation based upon past infections to a bit under 3 million.

We are actually just working from a rough estimate of IFR. In Spain they got an IFR of about 1.1. NYC seems similar. The study I linked to for California might suggest an IFR of between 0.15 and 0.3% (They have an issue with self selection bias, so I'm giving a 2:1 variation because of that, which is possibly extreme.) IFR is the number we need. I think there is much evidence that it varies a lot with factors we don't yet fully understand, but age demographics and racial demographics clearly matter. Maybe the average IFR will turn out to be about 0.8%. If you put a small bet on it being that you probably would not be wasting your money. 0.8 +/- 0.4 is my bet. But only by sticking my finger in the air. I think you would be taking very long odds on there being a major unknown component of the virus that changed the numbers much. Very rare complications are coming to light, but they are noise compared the gross IFR.

So, that gets you to an estimate of a worst case death count. One where there are no other mitigating factors or management. Still comes it at about 2 million. This is not of course a prediction. It is an estimate of an upper bound. The spectre of a second wave casts a shadow, and again, taking a bet on there being one that matches or exceeds the first one looks like smart money. But I don't think anyone thinks it will be allowed to progress as badly as historical pandemics.

In the end we assume, and hope, that we are smarter than that.

Last edited by Francis Vaughan; 05-28-2020 at 07:24 AM.
  #235  
Old 05-28-2020, 07:28 AM
Jasmine's Avatar
Jasmine is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 2,710
Well, we already hit a hundred thousand, so I'm thinking one to two hundred thousand.
__________________
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance -- it is the illusion of knowledge."
--Daniel J Boorstin
  #236  
Old 05-28-2020, 08:10 AM
casdave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,537
There seems to be around 58 thousand for April and will be around 40 thousand for May.

That means of the 102 thousand deaths, 98 thousand took place in just two months.

I would be surprised if it were to increase by more than 30 thousand for June - I think 25 thousand might be more realistic.

For July perhaps 21 thousand so by 1st August you would imagine total numbers being at maybe 140-145 thousand.

That would put the CDC model out by nearly 50%

There have been reports of Remsdvir offering the means to buy a little more recovery time - so one would expect that improvements to medical practice could reduce the toll, and the longer we look into the future the more I think the efficacy of treatment and support will improve.

Against that we have behavior, some of it will be ideologically driven but I think that economic pressure will force people to circulate more.

I would hope that it could be kept below 200 thousand up to 2021. I hope that is an overly pessimistic guess. There may well be significant adjustments made when the overall comparisons are made across the last decade and that could easily add 30 or 40 thousand that were not originally ascribed to Covid 19
  #237  
Old 05-28-2020, 08:11 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Vaughan View Post
In the end we assume, and hope, that we are smarter than that.
When it comes to humanity - and especially humanity as it is currently behaving - I'm not convinced the smart money is on smart people. But I agree that the "worst case" is an upper limit, not the likeliest outcome.
  #238  
Old 05-28-2020, 09:42 AM
Oredigger77 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Back at 5,280
Posts: 5,537
I'm still pretty with my low end estimate of 350k. I think social distancing did a lot to keep the death toll down initially and I don't think we have the political or social will to do that again in the fall so, while I think it will be high, I'm also pretty comfortable with my top end prediction of 1 million. Its a huge range though and I think 350k-500k it where the number will ultimately fall on 12/31.
  #239  
Old 05-28-2020, 05:36 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
When it comes to humanity - and especially humanity as it is currently behaving - I'm not convinced the smart money is on smart people. But I agree that the "worst case" is an upper limit, not the likeliest outcome.

It's frustrating, because I feel like if we really had the national will to do a full, true lockdown while we did a WWII-style ramp up in testing capacity, followed by a massive test and contact trace regime, we could keep the death toll from being all that much higher than it already is now. A vaccine would be mostly irrelevant. But that does not remotely appear to be in the cards.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #240  
Old Yesterday, 07:41 PM
Cartooniverse is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Betwixt My Ears
Posts: 12,767
Based on Second Wave elements of the 1918 Epidemic, coupled with modern-day American Entitlement & Arrogance ( AEA ), I'd conservatively guess 450,000.

You want to know what stock to buy? Buy stock in Mopec. These guys and others like them are going to be running 24/7 in production by November 1.
__________________
If you want to kiss the sky you'd better learn how to kneel.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017