COVID-19 Megathread 4: Grandma Got Run Over by the Dow Jones

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

The problem with people who presume that the restrictions are killing the economy is that they fail to understand that absent these restrictions, large number of people would not be attending or participating in risky economic activity.

Furthermore from a liability standpoint. How can you hold a concert, or a business conference in a world without the stay at home orders? You couldn't even begin to cover that liability, no insurance company on earth would cover that risk. No business would want to risk being sued into oblivion by people once they get infected.

With or without the stay at home orders and mitigation, the economy was going to get wrecked and until you get the virus under control and gone, you cannot conduct business. Not because the government won't allow you to, but because you literally cannot afford conduct business in this environment. Either you won't have any customers or you get sued into oblivion, or both.

I don't understand why the critics of the mitigation strategy don't account for this aspect of the economic effects of the virus.

That's why most of critique of Trump rings hollow and just lame attacking a straw man. Anyone understands you can't just magically re-start economy until it's under control. You have though to start to think about it.

"Grandma Got Run Over by the Dow Jones" straw man are so sweet. In US that is. In Europe the discussion on when and how you'll re-start economy has already started. But they don't have CNN, either.

Good thing is that Trump gave US 2 weeks. US will be able to see what and how well Europe is doing. That's among other things why I think US will handle it (much?) better than Europe.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

We are doing significantly better than the average of Europe so far.  The free East Asian countries are doing the best of all and we should think carefully about what we can learn from them.

What would be that? Testing? Sure (so Japanese didn't test that much as far as I know).

Many other things are cultural or historical built-ins
- washing your f**king hands
- not shaking hands
- wearing masks during flue season or similar
- less social overall?
- piety towards the System and politicians (this one would be hilarious) and accepting authoritarian methods/giving up freedoms, if they come form the System?

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Shocking how the same people who ignored a plethora of scientific studies suggesting a higher mortality rate when they were available are now taking one outlier regional study, written in a language they can't read, as gospel simply because it conforms with their opinion.

What studies? Even WaPo and CNN recognized eventually that most studies shows it in 0.3-1%. The study from Germany was in fact the FIRST true random study, other are estimations based of [incomplete] data.

Obviously, one study is just one study, but it was first proper one.

The study by researchers at the University of Bonn involves testing 1,000 individuals in the hard-hit district of Heinsberg in northwestern Germany in an attempt to ascertain the number of people who have been infected without realizing it.

The preliminary findings were based on results from 509 individuals, the researchers said in a news conference on Thursday.

Some 14 percent of the sample had antibodies for the disease, and an additional 2 percent had current infections. A death rate of 0.37 percent is well below the 3.4 percent case fatality rate cited by the World Health Organization last month and at the lower end of the 0.3 to 1 percent range that has been estimated by scientists.

Basically, all the studies showed Trump was right when he criticized ridiculous 3.7% of WHO. But CNN and MSNBC were... being CNN and MSNBC.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Re: models


*thread*
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1248643693684367360



Every model has overestimated. Even moderate models overestimated by factor of 2-3. Sure, better safe than sorry, but let's get real. Very unlikely, that any state will be hit harder than NY.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Shocking how the same people who ignored a plethora of scientific studies suggesting a higher mortality rate when they were available are now taking one outlier regional study, written in a language they can't read, as gospel simply because it conforms with their opinion.

What studies? Even WaPo and CNN recognized eventually that most studies shows it in 0.3-1%. The study from Germany was in fact the FIRST true random study, other are estimations based of [incomplete] data.

Obviously, one study is just one study, but it was first proper one.

The study by researchers at the University of Bonn involves testing 1,000 individuals in the hard-hit district of Heinsberg in northwestern Germany in an attempt to ascertain the number of people who have been infected without realizing it.

The preliminary findings were based on results from 509 individuals, the researchers said in a news conference on Thursday.

Some 14 percent of the sample had antibodies for the disease, and an additional 2 percent had current infections. A death rate of 0.37 percent is well below the 3.4 percent case fatality rate cited by the World Health Organization last month and at the lower end of the 0.3 to 1 percent range that has been estimated by scientists.

Basically, all the studies showed Trump was right when he criticized ridiculous 3.7% of WHO. But CNN and MSNBC were... being CNN and MSNBC.

Dawg, you're literally quoting something that states it's not a random study. It's the first sentence of the text you quoted.

From a Bayesian perspective, it's one study from a pool of studies. It adds information and informs our range of what we think plausible outcomes are, but there are other studies which plausibly give other values which produce a range of outcomes. And this even ignores plausible uncertainty in estimates within each of these models.

Acting like 0.36% is a definitive number rather than one of a suite of plausible mortality rates is dishonest and pushed by people who don't care or know enough about science on it to have a valid opinion.

Your shtick of turning every post into this thread into a referendum on Trump is extremely tedious by the way. Donald Trump couldn't tell the difference between heteroskedasticity and Oklahoma City. I have absolutely zero interest in his idiotic opinions on science and statistical models.

Where does it state it is not random?

Who's acting like it is "a definitive number"? It is "at the lower end of the 0.3 to 1 percent range that has been estimated by scientists", but it is first one TRUE study. The only way to get TRUE rate is randomly chose people. Like poll.

It is not my schtick. As I said when Trump rightfully questioned ridiculous WHO #s (based on China), because he had #s from South Korea, MSM and this thread went nuts. So I just pointed out that Trump was right.

The same by the way with Cuomo's ridiculous claim about 40,000 (when Italy had 2,000 totally) additional ventilators. As it is right now, it seems like 5,000 will be enough for NY.

Did you miss the part of the tweet you posted that said "the number of *deaths* has been broadly in line with models in NY State that assumed social distancing"?

The rest of the thread is dedicated to giving plausible alternative explanations for why you may still have a high case load without seeing a disproportionate increase in hospitalizations.

One of the reason of "flatten the curve" is to keep hospitals from overloading.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Taking samples from one region is by definition not random. Even if it was a random subset of people within that region (nothing in what you posted suggests that is true by the way) you need to do a lot of work to ensure that accurately is applicable to other regions. E.g., if there are discrepancies in the way tests are administered or causes of death are assigned between Germany and Spain, then you couldn't generalize these results to Spain unless you had some sort of corrections. It's the same reason why you have limited inference in applying mortality estimates from Lombardy to mortality estimates in Montana.

At best this study gives you the estimate of mortality for sick people in one region of Germany, and that's under ideal conditions of how these people were included in the survey.

What? Germany is also just a "region". Whole Europe as well... So we should stop doing these studies? LMAO.

Obviously, it will vary depending on age, or nations health (US is for instance a younger, but more obese smoking? not running etc nation than Germany).

Unfortunately, the source is not working, but you can find cache in google https://www.land.nrw/sites/default/files/asset/document/zwischenergebnis_covid19_case_study_gangelt.pdf

Hintergrund: Die Gemeinde Gangelt ist in Deutschland einer der am stärksten vonCOVID19 betroffenen Orte Deutschlands. Es wird angenommen, dass dasInfektionsgeschehen auf eine Karnevalssitzung am 15. Februar 2020 zurückzuführenist, da mehrere Personen im Nachgang zu dieser Sitzung SARSCoV2 positiv getestetwurden. Die Karnevalssitzung und das Ausbruchgeschehen der Sitzung wird derzeitnoch genauer untersucht. Es wurde eine repräsentative Stichprobe aus der GemeindeGangelt (12.529 Einwohner) im Kreis Heinsberg gezogen. DieWeltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) empfiehlt ein Protokoll, bei dem je nach zuerwartender Prävalenz stichprobenartig 100 bis 300 Haushalte untersucht werden.Diese Stichprobe wurde auf ihre Repräsentativität abgestimmt mit Herrn Prof. ManfredGüllner (Forsa).

Ziel: Das Ziel der Studie ist es, den Stand der durchgemachten und noch immerstattfindenden SARS-CoV2 Infektionen (Prozentsatz aller Infizierten) in der GemeindeGangelt zu bestimmen. Zusätzlich soll damit der Stand der derzeitigen SARS-CoV2Immunität ermittelt werden.

Vorgehen: Ein Serienbrief wurde an ca. 600 Haushalte verschickt. Insgesamt nahmenca. 1000 Einwohner aus ca. 400 Haushalten an der Studie teil. Es wurden Fragebögenerhoben, Rachenabstriche genommen und Blut auf das Vorliegen von Antikörper (IgG,IgA) getestet. In diese erste Auswertung gehen die Zwischenergebnisse undRückschlüsse von ca. 500 Personen ein.

Translation from here: https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/fxqszt/study_of_heinsberg_cluster_in_germany_suggests/fmvw144/

For context: Heinsberg is a municipality in Northrine-Westphalia. On February 15, a man who was unknowingly SARS-CoV-2 positive attended a large carnival event in the town of Gangelt, setting in motion the wide spread of SARS-CoV-2 within Heinsberg and the rest of the state.

Goal: The study aims to uncover the number of current and past SARS-CoV-2 infections in Gangelt with the intention of estimating the current level of immunity within the community.

Methods: A letter was sent to a representative sample of 600 households, asking them to participate in the study. 400 households, totaling 1000 people, chose to do so. Surveys were administered, pharyngeal swabs taken and antibody testing (IgG and IgA) was also done. 500 people were part of the group studied in this pre-publication.

Preliminary results: Present immunity was determined to be around 14% (anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG positive, Specificity 99%). Roughly 2% of participants showed an ongoing infection as determined by PCR. The combined percentage of past and present infections was found to be 15%. The case fatality rate relative to the total number of infected detected in this study was 0.37%. Lethality for Germany as a whole as determined by John-Hopkins University currently stands at a number five times higher: 1.98%. Mortality relative to the total population of Gangelt was found to be 0.06%. [This last sentence previously said 0.15%, by which they probably meant mortality from all causes for whatever reason. The number has been updated in the link in the comments.]

They mention in German the WHO's recommendation about at least 300 randomly chosen households.

It's not perfect, obviously, it is small, it is preliminary, it is [insert other caveats], but it is the (only) random study we have. And, as WaPo mentions, it is "at the lower end of the 0.3 to 1 percent range that has been estimated by scientists", so the results are NOT sensational, but inside previously estimated interval.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1248618725990739970
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1248618728192786433

Thanks to Trump, US has got a 2 weeks of valuable time!
LEARN FROM EUROPE! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/national/coronavirus-us-cases-deaths/


Data as of Apr. 11 at 4:51 a.m.

Cases:

Deaths:



Cases and Deaths, per state, raw:

Cases and Deaths, per state, per capita:





Totally 2,108 deaths were registered yesterday, of which 49% are from NY + NJ.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Still terrible #s from NY. But in a week #s will likely to go down.





Cuomo said that Trump have to repeal SALT to help his donors average middle-class Americans!

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1249007008264663042

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1249007008264663042

America first?

Okay, Hillary.

Population size....what a stupid comparison.

We would've had a 110% more competent response with Hillary & you know it.

I mean, I only wonder how many states would have already seceded if thrice-impeached President Hillary Clinton’s CDC has told the red state yokels not to go to church on Easter. 

This is a good point.  Many mistakes have been made, but Trump is undoubtedly a better messenger to red state governors (where the formal shutdown power lies) that Clinton and blue states were culturally more likely to support aggressive economic action regardless of what the federal government recommended.  Under a President Clinton, there would be ~15 governors denouncing the federal "conspiracy" and calling for Sweden-style business as usual in their states right now.

If Clinton tried to take matters into her own hands, an inevitable 5/4 or 6/3 (depending on what happened in the Senate in 2017-18) SCOTUS ruling on a national guard enforced federal lockdown would probably lead to Bleeding Kansas 2.0.     

If there is a crisis, you have to have a Republican in WH. Democrats have been making this case for years, I've been told.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1249007008264663042

America first?

Okay, Hillary.

Population size....what a stupid comparison.

We would've had a 110% more competent response with Hillary & you know it.

I mean, I only wonder how many states would have already seceded if thrice-impeached President Hillary Clinton’s CDC has told the red state yokels not to go to church on Easter. 

This is a good point.  Many mistakes have been made, but Trump is undoubtedly a better messenger to red state governors (where the formal shutdown power lies) that Clinton and blue states were culturally more likely to support aggressive economic action regardless of what the federal government recommended.  Under a President Clinton, there would be ~15 governors denouncing the federal "conspiracy" and calling for Sweden-style business as usual in their states right now.

If Clinton tried to take matters into her own hands, an inevitable 5/4 or 6/3 (depending on what happened in the Senate in 2017-18) SCOTUS ruling on a national guard enforced federal lockdown would probably lead to Bleeding Kansas 2.0.     

Basically, I see 4 areas where President's actions or lack of thereof could have mattered:

• border/flights restrictions. Trump overruled experts and likely saved ten of thousands of lives. Hillary wouldn't because muh it is what basket of deplorables wanted to.
• more testing. Trump could have overruled experts of CDC, but didn't. Hillary wouldn't because muh listen to science.
• more lock-downs. Trump could have been more supportive. Hillary couldn't because of the reasons you described.
• POPULIST BOOMER STIMULUS. Trump delivered. Hillary wouldn't because Evil Republicans wouldn't let her to.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Why is the administration so obsessed with hydrochloroquine when there are several other possible drugs out there that seem to have shown more promise with fewer side effects?

Because Trump has a stake in the companies that produce it.

Stop it. It was debunked.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-profit-hydroxychloroquine/
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-small-financial-ties-hydroxychloroquine-coronavirus-drug-maker-2020-4

Calculations by Business Insider suggest the stake — held via a trust and a mutual fund — is worth no more than $1,305.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Re: don't reflect, spread, let's them defend themselves

@ some quote-tweet-posters

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1248248827103961088
+

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1248684030129844226
Nate's on 🔥🔥🔥

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/COVID19Tracking/status/1249085827944271875

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/national/coronavirus-us-cases-deaths/


Data as of Apr. 12 at 3:15 a.m.

Cases:

Deaths:



Cases and Deaths, per state, raw:

Cases and Deaths, per state, per capita:






Yesterday:
1,877 deaths, of which 54% (771+251) are from NY + NJ.
Totally so far:
20,506 deaths, of which 53% (8,638+2,183) are from NY + NJ.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

I don't celebrate, but to all those who do: Happy Easter, y'all.

Please please stay home.  

https://twitter.com/TheTweetOfGod/status/1249234965537017856

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/KellyO/status/1249421001689051136