Coronavirus COVID-19 (2019-nCoV) Thread - 2020 Breaking News

Today in Austria:

[ul]
[li] Following closely on the heels of its landmark statistical study of coronavirus infections, Austria is set to carry out a second such study, this time with 2800 randomly selected participants from across the country. The goal of this study is to determine how fast the virus is spreading. The two studies are unique in continental Europe in that they are testing a representative sample of the entire population, not just those already suspected of having the disease, and so give a better idea of how many infections have gone undetected or unreported. (Analysis of data from the first study showed that Austria probably had around 28,500 infections, compared to the 8600 cases confirmed by selective testing.) The second study begins tomorrow morning and the results should be available by the end of the month.[/li]
[li] Yesterday the government faced criticisms from the media and opposition parties about the legality and constitutionality of its pandemic response measures, particularly after the chancellor brushed these concerns off with the excuse that it was more important to act quickly to contain the spread of the virus. To avoid further fallout, today the health minister announced the formation of a committee of legal experts who will be tasked with examining the legal and human rights questions of the government’s recent actions. The committee includes the former president of the Supreme Administrative Court of Austria.[/li]
[li] Doctors in Austria are warning of collateral damage as a result of all non-urgent medical procedures being postponed, as well as people generally avoiding hospitals, clinics, and practices rather than seeking diagnosis and treatment for potentially serious problems. For example, cardiologists at one hospital in Vienna report that they are normally overwhelmed by walk-in patients complaining of heart problems, but these days they see only one or two patients per day. Doctors with their own practices are calling on the government to make up their shortfall in income this year; many of them are currently seeing 90% fewer patients than usual.[/li]
[li] With the reopening of some shops yesterday, attendance at state-run day-care centres has doubled, though in absolute terms the numbers remain low: for example, in Vienna, only 1.8% of the children who normally attend day-care are currently attending.[/li]
[li] The vice chancellor, who is also the country’s sport minister, today announced plans to allow certain sports starting on 1 May. These include outdoor sports that don’t involve close contact between the participants, including golf, equestrian sports, tennis, certain track and field events, and shooting. Professional soccer is a special exception: teams in the national league will be able to resume play, with the proviso that players be tested for the virus before every match; tests must be carried out at the league’s own expense. All sports must be played without live spectators, though professional sports can be televised. For those exercising alone outdoors, new social distance rules are to be observed: joggers must keep five metres’ distance from other people, runners ten metres, and cyclists twenty.[/li]
[li] It’s now once again permitted to use public transportation for “recreational” purposes (i.e., to take a bus, tram, or subway to a park so that you can go for a walk there).[/li]
[li] The states of Tyrol and Carinthia have flown in 122 temporary foreign workers from Romania to help with the harvest. They will, of course, be subject to a mandatory two-week quarantine. The state of Burgenland has likewise flown in 100 care workers from Croatia, but has secured from the federal government a special exception to the normal quarantine rules.[/li]
[li] The Czech Republic has announced that the Czech–Austrian border will remain closed until at least the end of May.[/li]
[li] Current statistics: 14,321 confirmed infections, 393 deaths, 8098 recovered. [/li][/ul]

No problem! I guess my posts run a bit long sometimes so it may be easy to overlook or forget about a certain piece of news I’ve relayed.

Glad to hear that!

I put the following together to satisfy my own curiosity, but thought some folks here might also find it interesting and so I’m sharing. I was looking at graphs of Oregon and U.S. stats and thinking that things were starting to even out, but I wanted to confirm that numerically and learned that things are far worse than the gradually flattening and even declining curves had suggested to me.

I looked at changes in how many people are dying from covid-19 in the U.S. Using data from covidtracking.com, I looked at 5-day rolling averages and compared the period ending 14 April to the period ending 7 April. Using data from census.gov from the ACS (a 5-year sampling average ending 2018), I calculated the number of covid-19 deaths in each state each day per million residents. The listings below are in alphabetical order.

No state reduced the rate at which people are dying by more than 33%.

16 states saw a decline or no change in the rate at which people are dying: AK, GA, HI, KY, ME, MT, NE, NH, OK, OR, SD, TN, UT, VT, WA, WI

12 states saw an increase of up to 50% in the rate at which people are dying: AL, AZ, FL, IA, LA, MS, NC, NY, OH, PR, SC, TX

11 states saw an increase from 50% to 100% in the rate at which people are dying: CA, CO, CT, IL, IN, KS, MI, MN, MO, NJ, PA

13 states saw an increase of over 100% in the rate at which people are dying: AR, DC, DE, ID, MA, MD, ND, NM, NV, RI, VA, WV, WY

The average state (including D.C. and Puerto Rico) saw a 48% increase in the rate of covid-19 deaths over the last week.

My conclusion: I made the mistake of confusing a decline in growth with a decline in effect. The rate at which the rate is increasing has declined, but that doesn’t mean things are getting better; some states have possibly cleared one hurdle, but there are more to follow. I feel silly for making that mistake, but if I can do that then others might also and without the benefit of the resources I have to test that notion and prove it false.

While death stats certainly grab our attention, and with good reason, they lag the actual infection rate. It takes up to several weeks for the disease to actually kill someone. It is the improvement in the latter that is driving some optimism.

I do not see any reason to have faith in infection statistics until testing is consistent across time, region, and within the population. My impression is that the use of tests varies widely from time to time, practitioner to practitioner, facility to facility, and region to region. I use death stats not because they are poignant, and despite the inaccuracies in attributing causes of death, but because they appear to be the most informative data available. I’d be happy to be convinced that another indicator, such as confirmed infection rates, is more accurate.

I don’t think there is any perfect stat, but you would hope that the leveling off of “active cases” would predict a dramatic reduction in total deaths. Deaths can, of course, never go negative. But with increased testing, the overall rate of death should fall. It’s far more likely that someone sick hasn’t been tested yet than someone has died without ever knowing they had it (although this does happen).

In other news, back to school in Denmark?

Taneytown Police remind residents to wear pants while checking mailbox

I can’t wear a skirt? You mean I shaved my legs for nothing?

A kilt is acceptable.

I agree with what I think you’re saying: infection rates are more current (less lagging), and should correlate with all outcomes, including death.

Here are examples of why I distrust the rate of confirmed infections:

Washington state saw a 63% reduction in new cases (in the same periods and same calculation methods as my first post, above), but also saw a 95% reduction in the number of people tested. Idaho: 56% drop in confirmations, 35% drop in tests. West Virginia: 40% drop in confirmations, 52% drop in tests.

Louisiana: 55% drop in confirmations, 34% increase in tests. Everything else the same, more tests should mean more confirmations, but in cases where there’s a large shift in the number of tests there’s likely a correspondingly large shift in the manner of selecting test subjects, which means those populations/confirmations are likely not comparable. 33 states had a change in testing volume of less than 10%; the 12 states with the largest decrease in number of confirmed cases all had changes in testing volume over 15%, averaging 38%. I propose that this disparity in confirmation rates provides evidence of either (1) a reduction in the infection rate or (2) that earlier confirmation methods yield results that are incomparable with their more recent confirmation methods; I see no evidence that (1) is more likely than (2), but I’m not an expert and might be, or rather certainly am, missing important information.

I’d be very happy to find out in two weeks that things really were improving today – where improvement means “the situation is getting better” rather than “the curve is flattening” aka “we’re making things get worse more slowly” – I just don’t see any convincing evidence of that fact. But I do see evidence to the contrary.

Do assless chaps count?

Good thing that is not Britain, where, AIUI, “pants” refers to underthings.

CDC is now going to include probable cases in its tallies. China did the same thing at one point in Feb and their numbers suddenly jumped.

I’ve not been to Moab UT lately but a river-rafting friend says sunburnt men in kilts are not unknown there.

Back to the news. Our little rough rural redneck county reports today:

  • Laboratory Confirmed Cases: 7
  • Hospitalized COVID-19 Cases to Date: 2
  • Recovered Cases: 5
  • Deaths: 0

But no count of tests, so who knows the rates? And no news from the state prison in the county lowlands so no idea if it’s bad there.

2,083,326 confirmed infections
134,616 dead
510,350 recovered

In the US:

644,089 confirmed infections
28,529 dead
48,708 recovered

Yesterday’s numbers for comparison:

The US should top 30,000 deaths tomorrow.

We get numb to these numbers and it’s easy to forget that these are real people dying. I noticed that the increase in deaths today (2465) is basically the student population of my child’s school. It’s weird to think that it’s like everybody in the school died today.

Ahem.

Big school. That’s more than the combined population of the two towns closest to me.

CNN’s tracker, at the time I am writing this (still not tomorrow PDT) has the tally of lost souls at just a few short of 31K. I saw it go over 30K several hours ago.

On the counties map, down the page, I see that my brother lives in one of the grey (no cases) ones.