# why are deaths dropping but infection rate stabilizing? **URL:** \ **Category:** The Quarantine Zone\ **Tags:** covid-quarantine\ **Created:** [June 16, 2020, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779 "2020-06-16T15:38:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/121 "2020-07-15T01:11:49Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > This is just going to continue. Has the OP been answered yet? Is anyone surprised? It’s proceeding exactly as how we’ve seen. I don’t see a lower death rate in San Antonio compared to the “first wave”. Hospitalizations started going up about a week after cases started to increase. About a week after that, ICU numbers started to go up. Three weeks after cases started to rise, deaths started to go up. Sadly, it’s like clockwork. ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/122 "2020-07-15T01:23:52Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > The data linked above by **Tfletch1** would seem to suggest that either there was a profound change in people getting exposed to the virus or the virus ran out of people to expose. Actually, I interpreted the data the same way as **Asahi**. Even hard hit parts of NYC may have only 35% of people exposed. Wealthy areas maybe had 10% antibodies. If herd immunity requires 60-70%, even NY would have a long way to go. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/123 "2020-07-15T02:08:00Z")
> [@Tfletch1](#): > > > [@SayTwo](#): > > > > The data linked above by **Tfletch1** would seem to suggest that either there was a profound change in people getting exposed to the virus or the virus ran out of people to expose. > > … If herd immunity requires 60-70%, even NY would have a long way to go. Do you appreciate how _big_ of an “if” that is? 1. The number is a guess based off of a working assumption that SARS-CoV-2 will behave similar to influenza … which in many many ways it does not, not the least of which being that children, especially those 11 and under, _amplify_ the spread of influenza, and are at best fairly poor transmitters of SARS-CoV-2. No one is doing anything than making a guess for this bug. Could be 60 to 70% of adults overall. Unknown. 2. Herd immunity is _not a universal constant._ (Just like R naught is not.) What functions as herd immunity will vary based on the behaviors and demographics of a specific neighborhood and region, and how those interact with the specifics of this germ’s transmission. A neighborhood that has multiple generations of young to elderly adults all living in loud close quarters, will take a higher percent functionally immune to slow down spread than one that fewer generations living all together, in which there is more time spent not right on top of a bunch of other people, and which is not as loud. 3. Antibody positivity may or may not be a good proxy for immunity. Unknown. 4. Off the point some but in fact it seems that this statement: > [@RitterSport](#): > > Working-class people have not been able to shut down, since their jobs typically require more hand-on work. That’s why black and Latino deaths have been so much higher than other ethnic groups. is not the complete story. See [this Nature article](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2521-4_reference.pdf). > [@](#): > > People from South Asian and black groups had a substantially higher risk of death, only partially > attributable to co-morbidity, deprivation or other risk factors. A strong association between deprivation and risk was only partly attributable to co-morbidity or other risk factors. Big fricken study. Controlling for confounders Black ethnicity increased risk by 48% compared to white. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/124 "2020-07-15T02:16:32Z")
> [@Tfletch1](#): > > … I don’t see a lower death rate in San Antonio compared to the “first wave”. … First of all this really IS the first wave there. Second of all the average daily mortality rate was in the 3s/million for most of March into April there and is now under 1. For right now the lower death rate is there whether you see it or not. The total number of deaths per day is higher more due to the much larger number of those infected. (An order of magnitude more confirmed cases per day now than then.) ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/125 "2020-07-15T04:11:18Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > - The number is a guess based off of a working assumption that SARS-CoV-2 will behave similar to influenza … which in many many ways it does not, not the least of which being that children, especially those 11 and under, _amplify_ the spread of influenza, and are at best fairly poor transmitters of SARS-CoV-2. No one is doing anything than making a guess for this bug. Could be 60 to 70% of adults overall. Unknown. > - Herd immunity is _not a universal constant._ (Just like R naught is not.) What functions as herd immunity will vary based on the behaviors and demographics of a specific neighborhood and region, and how those interact with the specifics of this germ’s transmission. A neighborhood that has multiple generations of young to elderly adults all living in loud close quarters, will take a higher percent functionally immune to slow down spread than one that fewer generations living all together, in which there is more time spent not right on top of a bunch of other people, and which is not as loud. > - Antibody positivity may or may not be a good proxy for immunity. Unknown. Please don’t lecture me about whether or not I know that the number for herd immunity is a “universal constant”. The 67% is assuming the Ro is 3. To get down to 40% for herd immunity the Ro needs to be below 2. So 60-70% is a reasonable assumption. Not so big an IF. Considering the incubation and prodromal stage for the flu is shorter than that for covid-19, and that those with covid-19 shed virus while still presymptomatic, an Ro larger than the flu is reasonable and appears to match what we’re observing. I am aware that people can lose their detectable antibody titer as they heal. If it is true that antibody tests are significantly underestimating those that were infected than that would only drive up the Ro and drive up the % required for herd immunity. ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/126 "2020-07-15T14:34:50Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > First of all this really IS the first wave there. > > Second of all the average daily mortality rate was in the 3s/million for most of March into April there and is now under 1. For right now the lower death rate is there whether you see it or not. Hence the quotation marks. Although San Antonio really never had a wave, just a small ripple. Now we’re having our first wave. As far as death rates, they’ve been pretty steady per age range. Right now they’re at 7% for +65 and about 0.9% for 41-64 yr olds. The 41-64 yr old may be a little lower right now because we are still in a surge of new cases but I don’t remember it being that different except at the very beginning of the pandemic when case numbers were wildly inaccurate. Of course the 18-40 (mostly people in their 20’s and early 30’s) have a very low death rate 0.08%. However, again, the vast majority of these cases are recent so this will probably climb. Obviously these are case fatality rates but they’re not too far off from estimated infection fatality rates. New approaches (holding off on vents, pepcid, dexamethasone, anticoagulants, recovered patient plasma, antivirals) have saved lives relative to very early in the pandemic, but these approaches have been used for a few months now. So, I’m predicting death rates to rise in San Antonio, not decrease. If we are successful in keeping the virus away from vulnerable populations, we may be okay but I’m not optimistic. We can close down bars and restaurants and enforce masks, but how are we going to stop people from visiting their parents and grandparents? I’ll just cross my fingers and hope that our public campaign works. Thankfully, we have a good mayor along with Bexar county judge. ---
**Author:** ![RealityCheck71](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitycheck71/32/3493_2.png) [@RealityCheck71](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityCheck71)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/127 "2020-07-15T15:23:24Z")
> [@Tfletch1](#): > > The 67% is assuming the Ro is 3. To get down to 40% for herd immunity the Ro needs to be below 2. So 60-70% is a reasonable assumption But why is Ro between 2-3 a reasonable assumption though? I’ve seen estimates from 1.4 - 4. ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/128 "2020-07-15T15:27:41Z")
This thread won’t have much to talk about once the White House Covid Dashboard shows deaths going to zero… > **[Trump administration cuts CDC out of data collection on hospitalized COVID-19...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/07/15/trump-administration-orders-hospitals-not-send-covid-19-data-cdc/5441730002/)** > > The decision to bypass CDC had an immediate effect. A webpage that tracked the number of COVID patients in the nation's hospital beds ceased. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/129 "2020-07-15T15:27:55Z")
> [@Tfletch1](#): > > We can close down bars and restaurants and enforce masks, but how are we going to stop people from visiting their parents and grandparents? I’ll just cross my fingers and hope that our public campaign works. Thankfully, we have a good mayor along with Bexar county judge. Ultimately, you don’t stop people = everyone from visiting Grandma. But to the degree that fewer _infected_ people visit Grandma, Grandma will have a much better outcome. And in the midst of a boom in younger cases, the more Grandma has the smarts to tell 'em to call instead, the more likely she is to survive another month until the risk recedes a smidgen. So yes, you’re going to have a mini-surge of dead elders a few weeks after a mega-surge in youthful + middle aged infections. We’re “enjoying” that mini-surge here in SoFL right now. It’s really amazing how well this disease aligns with the weaknesses of US society. Most harms from thoughtless behavior accrue to others not to self? Check. Most harms from thoughtless behavior come 2-6 weeks in the future, far beyond the typical attention span? Check. Harms are concentrated among the lower SES? Check. Harms are concentrated among the non-white? Check. I’m the farthest thing from a CTer, and I totally believe SARS-COV-2 is a product of Nature not of man, but still and all, this is really really good at hitting us where we’re really really bad. Hence the ugly outcomes to date and the even worse ones ahead. And that’s before we include the baleful influence of our national “leadership”. ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/130 "2020-07-15T16:20:26Z")
> [@RealityCheck71](#): > > But why is Ro between 2-3 a reasonable assumption though? I’ve seen estimates from 1.4 - 4. Are you talking about with mitigation Ro or Ro’s without anything? Before the shutdown, Ro estimates for places hit early range from 3 to over 6. Obviously, the low end of the scale would be for places not hit right away where people changed their behavior (or culture is naturally isolationist) or they’re in the middle of nowhere. If you live in the middle of nowhere, maybe an Ro of 2 would be too high. > **[Preliminary prediction of the basic reproduction number of the Wuhan novel...](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32048815/)** > > The early transmission ability of 2019-nCoV is close to or slightly higher than SARS. It is a controllable disease with moderate to high transmissibility. Timely and effective control measures are needed to prevent the further transmissions. > **[2020.05.17.20104653v3.full.pdf](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.17.20104653v3.full.pdf)** > > 550.09 KB > **[The reproduction number of COVID-19 and its correlation with public health...](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088047v3)** > > Throughout the past six months, no number has dominated the public media more persistently than the reproduction number of COVID-19. This powerful but simple concept is widely used by the public media, scientists, and political decision makers to... ---
**Author:** ![RealityCheck71](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitycheck71/32/3493_2.png) [@RealityCheck71](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityCheck71)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/131 "2020-07-15T16:24:06Z")
> [@](#): > > In the meantime, epidemiologists are reckoning with the uncertainty around SARS-CoV-2’s biological parameters by assuming a range of values rather than fixed numbers, says University of Idaho epidemiologist [Benjamin Ridenhour](https://www.uidaho.edu/sci/math/people/faculty/ben-ridenhour), who is helping state officials predict the spread of the virus. He’s placing confidence intervals around every biological parameter in his model. His R0 could be anywhere from around 1.3 to 4, he says. “That way, obviously the chances that anything you model is exactly correct are zero, but hopefully you can capture it in that range somewhere.” > **[Why R0 Is Problematic for Predicting COVID-19 Spread](https://www.the-scientist.com/why-r0-is-problematic-for-predicting-covid-19-spread-67690)** > > The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has revealed the limitations of R0 as no other disease outbreak has before, at a time when policymakers need accurate forecasts. ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/132 "2020-07-15T16:28:40Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > It’s really amazing how well this disease aligns with the weaknesses of US society. Most harms from thoughtless behavior accrue to others not to self? Check. Most harms from thoughtless behavior come 2-6 weeks in the future, far beyond the typical attention span? Check. Harms are concentrated among the lower SES? Check. Harms are concentrated among the non-white? Check. > > I’m the farthest thing from a CTer, and I totally believe SARS-COV-2 is a product of Nature not of man, but still and all, this is really really good at hitting us where we’re really really bad. Hence the ugly outcomes to date and the even worse ones ahead. > > And that’s before we include the baleful influence of our national “leadership”. Absolutely. Although since Trump got elected, this outcome has not surprised me a bit. ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2020, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/133 "2020-07-15T16:58:11Z")
> [@RealityCheck71](#): > > In the meantime, epidemiologists are reckoning with the uncertainty around SARS-CoV-2’s biological parameters by assuming a range of values rather than fixed numbers, says University of Idaho epidemiologist [Benjamin Ridenhour](https://www.uidaho.edu/sci/math/people/faculty/ben-ridenhour), who is helping state officials predict the spread of the virus. He’s placing confidence intervals around every biological parameter in his model. His R0 could be anywhere from around 1.3 to 4, he says. “That way, obviously the chances that anything you model is exactly correct are zero, but hopefully you can capture it in that range somewhere.” Which is exactly what I was talking about. In fact, the article has a whole section on “contact rates”. With mitigation, the Ro obviously drops. But herd immunity is talking about the biological characteristics of the virus and natural contact rates for a society. Otherwise, it’s not herd immunity, it’s the more desirable approach which is to get Ro (or Re) so low for a long time that the virus is largely eliminated from the population at least temporarily until the next flair up. Then play wack-a-mole for flair ups. So if you live in butt fuck egypt where nobody likes each other, fine, your Ro is well below 1. Great. If you live in a fairly dense region where people socialize, then, yeah, an Ro of 2.5-3 is probably a reasonable estimate meaning, you’d have to reach 60-70% infected to reach herd immunity. Or you do at least the minimal of wearing masks and closing bars to get the Ro (or Re anyway) down for a long time. We fucked up too bad in Texas, even San Antonio. So we’re going to be like this who knows how long, unless we do a full shutdown which we can’t afford. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2020, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/134 "2020-07-16T01:34:05Z")
The state I am most interested in following right now is Louisiana. It’s the only state with a current significant surge that actually had a first one of real significance. New confirmed cases started going up two weeks ago. The others rising significantly now are all first surges and the other states that had big first surges are staying pretty flat despite a good fraction of misbehaving citizens. This is a chance to somewhat falsify a speculation (not strong enough to call it a hypothesis) that significant first surges would blunt the severity and rapidity of a second one. Total death rates/million significantly rising on schedule by the end of next week, following Arizona and Florida in scale, scope, and slope, just behind a week, would make that speculation much less likely. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2020, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/135 "2020-07-16T12:23:08Z")
> **[A second coronavirus death surge is coming — The Atlantic](https://apple.news/Apkn94yPqQdShx__OP8-5ig)** > > There was always a logical explanation for why cases rose through the end of June while deaths did not. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2020, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/136 "2020-07-16T12:29:18Z")
> [@robby](#): > > [A second coronavirus death surge is coming](https://apple.news/Apkn94yPqQdShx__OP8-5ig) > [@](#): > > …Despite political leaders trivializing the pandemic, deaths are rising again: The seven-day average for deaths per day has now jumped by more than 200 since July 6, according to data compiled by the COVID Tracking Project at The Atlantic. By our count, states reported 855 deaths today, in line with the recent elevated numbers in mid-July. > > The deaths are not happening in unpredictable places. Rather, people are dying at higher rates where there are lots of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations: in Florida, Arizona, Texas, and California, as well as a host of smaller southern states that all rushed to open up. > > The deaths are also not happening in an unpredictable amount of time after the new outbreaks emerged. Simply look at the curves yourself. Cases began to rise on June 16; a week later, hospitalizations began to rise. Two weeks after that—21 days after cases rose—states began to report more deaths. That’s the exact number of days that the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has estimated](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html) from the onset of symptoms to the reporting of a death. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2020, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/137 "2020-07-16T16:02:38Z")
I was reading an article earlier (not going to link to it) that was saying that the projections are that deaths are set to spike in the next week or so. I’ve been following the CDC’s website, and it looks like we’ve been at around 1000 deaths a day for the last few weeks, so I presume this would mean a spike in those daily deaths. The known infection rate seems to be something like 100k a day if I’m reading the graph correctly for the country, with the total now nearly 3.5 million (it will be 3.5 million before the day is out, for sure). I’ve also been reading other reports that several states medical systems are getting back to the saturation level and on the cusp of being overwhelmed. ---
**Author:** ![RealityCheck71](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitycheck71/32/3493_2.png) [@RealityCheck71](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityCheck71)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2020, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/138 "2020-07-16T16:08:11Z")
Your numbers are ballpark correct except new cases is only ~70k/day ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2020, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/139 "2020-07-16T17:30:05Z")
Given that CDC has been hijacked and data management is being taken over on Trump’s orders can you really trust those numbers now? ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2020, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779/140 "2020-07-17T15:17:42Z")
> [@casdave](#): > > Given that CDC has been hijacked and data management is being taken over on Trump’s orders can you really trust those numbers now ? “One day it’ll be like a miracle and disappear” Well, that miracle day has arrived! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-deaths-dropping-but-infection-rate-stabilizing/855779.md?page=8)