COVID-19 Megathread 5: The Trumps catch COVID-19

[QAnonKelly]

https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1254513987196248065?s=20

Grandpa forgot to take his meds again

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1254513987196248065?s=20
Grandpa forgot to take his meds again

Duh, everyone knows that Obama has a time machine.  That's how he inserted his birth announcements in the Honolulu newspapers.

[Joe Biden is your president. Deal with it.]

Soooo how are today’s numbers looking??

[Calthrina950]

Soooo how are today’s numbers looking??

I'd imagine Arch is going to post their daily update soon.

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1254513987196248065?s=20
Grandpa forgot to take his meds again

Duh, everyone knows that Obama has a time machine.  That's how he inserted his birth announcements in the Honolulu newspapers.

Yeah, you got 'em Rudy! It's not like Trump was elected in 2016.....oh wait...

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Soooo how are today’s numbers looking??

Much, much better - even with a ton of testing.

[Koharu]

If people can't develop immunity, as there have been hints of since the beginning, this may end up fundamentally changing our society. Obviously things won't remain exactly as they are now forever, but there will be significant change from the old "normal."

There have been literally zero hints towards this.

'No Evidence' Yet That Recovered COVID-19 Patients Are Immune, WHO Says
Recovered coronavirus patients are testing positive again. Can you get reinfected?
Questions raised over COVID-19 reinfection after Japanese woman develops illness again

There's tons more, going back to at least mid-March, if my memory serves.

Don't call me a liar. I make sure my opinions are stated as such, and unlike many others, I don't make up information to suit my argument.

Anyway, my point was that we may see masks become part of daily life, as well as other things I can't think of but would be different than how life is now to keep the reproduction number down while the least vulnerable return to work. Life will be different.

[It’s so Joever]

If people can't develop immunity, as there have been hints of since the beginning, this may end up fundamentally changing our society. Obviously things won't remain exactly as they are now forever, but there will be significant change from the old "normal."

There have been literally zero hints towards this.

'No Evidence' Yet That Recovered COVID-19 Patients Are Immune, WHO Says
Recovered coronavirus patients are testing positive again. Can you get reinfected?
Questions raised over COVID-19 reinfection after Japanese woman develops illness again

There's tons more, going back to at least mid-March, if my memory serves.

Don't call me a liar. I make sure my opinions are stated as such, and unlike many others, I don't make up information to suit my argument.

Anyway, my point was that we may see masks become part of daily life, as well as other things I can't think of but would be different than how life is now to keep the reproduction number down while the least vulnerable return to work. Life will be different.

A test with a high false negative rate is bound to have stuff like this occur occasionally.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Since Arch seems to be a little late tonight, here's Nate Silver's summary from earlier today:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1254525465592725504

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

If people can't develop immunity, as there have been hints of since the beginning, this may end up fundamentally changing our society. Obviously things won't remain exactly as they are now forever, but there will be significant change from the old "normal."

There have been literally zero hints towards this.

'No Evidence' Yet That Recovered COVID-19 Patients Are Immune, WHO Says
Recovered coronavirus patients are testing positive again. Can you get reinfected?
Questions raised over COVID-19 reinfection after Japanese woman develops illness again

There's tons more, going back to at least mid-March, if my memory serves.

Don't call me a liar. I make sure my opinions are stated as such, and unlike many others, I don't make up information to suit my argument.

Anyway, my point was that we may see masks become part of daily life, as well as other things I can't think of but would be different than how life is now to keep the reproduction number down while the least vulnerable return to work. Life will be different.

Did you read the second two articles, as opposed to just the headlines?
Both of them include quotes from several doctors describing why an independent reinfection in these scenarios is very improbable, in contrast to several other much more likely explanations.

As far as I know, we still have yet to see a single confirmed case of independent reinfection.  Does this prove that reinfection is impossible?

Logically, no.  
But this seems to be kind of like an “All ravens are black” problem.  If you see one white raven, you’ve proven the statement is false.  If you see a thousand consecutive black ravens, you still haven’t logically proven the statement is true.  But you might be reasonably convinced it is very likely to be true by induction.

So far, this is a case where we have seen 3 million black ravens and zero white ravens.  

[Tintrlvr]

If people can't develop immunity, as there have been hints of since the beginning, this may end up fundamentally changing our society. Obviously things won't remain exactly as they are now forever, but there will be significant change from the old "normal."

There have been literally zero hints towards this.

'No Evidence' Yet That Recovered COVID-19 Patients Are Immune, WHO Says
Recovered coronavirus patients are testing positive again. Can you get reinfected?
Questions raised over COVID-19 reinfection after Japanese woman develops illness again

There's tons more, going back to at least mid-March, if my memory serves.

Don't call me a liar. I make sure my opinions are stated as such, and unlike many others, I don't make up information to suit my argument.

Anyway, my point was that we may see masks become part of daily life, as well as other things I can't think of but would be different than how life is now to keep the reproduction number down while the least vulnerable return to work. Life will be different.

The "Japanese woman gets reinfected" story was debunked almost immediately.

https://www.wired.com/story/did-a-woman-get-coronavirus-twice-scientists-are-skeptical/

The article about Korean patients being "reinfected" contains a very clear explanation of what was going on: "For now, the most likely explanation of why people are retesting positive seems to be that the test is picking up remnants of the virus"

Moreover, given the extremely low overall rate of infection in Korea, 2% of former coronavirus patients being infected again - when around 0.02% of the Korean population as a whole has been infected throughout the entire outbreak - would be extraordinarily unlikely. And Korea is one of the only countries where testing is very obviously sufficient to catch the vast majority of cases.

As for the WHO, they are just being extra-cautious and, for an institution that should realize its role is also public relations, overly scientific in their terminology. They didn't say there is any evidence whatsoever of a lack of immunity; all they said was that they don't have proof that there is immunity. The media is predictably terrible at understanding science and has interpreted it as meaning that there is evidence of a lack of immunity.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

1.  The availability of testing is the primary determinant of new case counts, which makes its value as an indicator of the pandemic's progression inherently problematic.  This is mainstream opinion.  U.S. testing capacity has continued to expand and the test-positive rate has declined, suggesting that the level of U.S. testing has sufficiently expanded to keep-up with growth in new cases.

Lmao that's not why your post was so egregiously bad. You tried, in the first week of April, to say that the declining rate of growth in the absolute number of positive cases indicated that we were past peak. Not only was it hilariously untrue that we peaked at the end of March but you literally ignored the fact that there was an increase in the raw number of cases over the prior week and instead opted to herald the fact that we had a decreasing percentage of cases even though this is explained by the fact that the ratio features an increasing denominator.

That level of innumeracy alone is reason to doubt most of what you say.
 

2.  The "worldwide deaths per capita" includes countries where there's practically zero testing, and therefore zero cases and zero deaths attributable to COVID-19.  ~30% of U.S. deaths have been in New York, the U.S. death rate excluding New York is only 120/1M.  Let's compare that to the 67,000/1M in the U.S. who are now U3 unemployed (so it doesn't even include people who have taken reduced hours, stopped looking for work, etc.)  The economic consequences (mostly brought on by lockdowns and other restrictions) of this virus have by far eclipsed the death toll.        

Brilliant analysis. If you exclude New York city then the number of cases per capita in the US goes down. Maybe I was underrating your quantitative instincts before.

Of course, to your point, there is an alternative way to supplement or provide income to these people: give them government assistance! Weird how you never invoke this as an option! It's almost as if you are concern trolling about the economic impact.

Also absolutely ridiculous and unfounded claim that most of the economic damage is due to the lockdowns and not to, uh, a highly contagious and deadly virus which has a high number of asymptomatic carriers. The fact that we saw >5 million people sign up for unemployment insurance before any of these lockdowns were even ordered is obvious evidence for this. The fact that restaurants are still operating and not coming anywhere near standard business levels is evidence for this. The fact that stay at home orders are still overwhelmingly popular by over 2-1 margins is also evidence for this.

I'm sure the response to this is going to be some nonsense claim that "the media" oversensationalized this and convinced people to not order take out at restaurants or some similar nonsense.

3.  The U.S. is not on an Italy-type trajectory.  Outside of a few isolated cases in New York City, hospitals have not had to triage patients.  There was no shortage of ventilators.  Hospital and ICUs across the U.S. are more empty now than they were at the beginning of March.  This, quite frankly, doesn't look like a pandemic in most of the U.S.  Demographic, institutional and cultural differences between the U.S. and Italy go far in explaining why the pandemic's progression has been so different in the two countries.  I don't see how this is a controversial observation.

Uhm... if you look at per-capita case loads by state and compare them to case loads per province in Italy you get rather similar numbers. Just like in the US/NYC, one region (Lombardy) accounting for more cases than the next three hardest-hit regions and has 10x the cases as the sixth largest region (out of 20!) These Italian cases of triaging and shortages were also happening almost exclusively in Lombardy. If "does this feel like a pandemic in the whole country" is your criteria for differentiating the two then it's failing to meet your standard.

Source; data is only two days old.

And that wasn't even the worst part the your post. I was mainly referring to the "success story" part; strange how this catastrophically bad impact on the economy, which was totally avoidable according to you, doesn't stop the US from being a "success story".

4.  All U.S. death statistics rely on state reporting, which necessarily has different standards/lags.  There is no Federal/CDC death count that is independent of what states are reporting.  This is the data we have, and I'm only letting it speak.  All mortality data suggests the elderly are exceptionally more at-risk than <50s, and the chicken littles' obsession with outlier cases and anecdotes is not an accurate representation of what is happening.      

You can let it speak but I still see nothing from you that acknowledges or even indicates that you understand that this data is incomplete (at the time you posted it it had less than half of the total number of fatalities accounted for) and that any inference from it is, to borrow a concept you appear to care about, quite imprecise.

The age-dependent mortality has, of course, been a central feature of reporting since the very beginning. This was a central part of reporting when the virus was still confined to Wuhan! Of course people with pre-conditions are more likely to be elderly; nobody has ever said anything resembling the contrary. To this day I do not understand the point you were trying to make. Of course the weirdest thing about this argument is that it, apparently, presumes that elderly people can only catch the disease from other elderly people... as if there was not a benefit to limiting the number of asymptomatic younger carriers!

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Since Arch seems to be a little late tonight, here's Nate Silver's summary from earlier today:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1254525465592725504

There's that Sunday drop off

[Koharu]

Please don't move the goalposts. I said there had been hints that immunity may not be a simple issue and someone quoted me saying there had been none. I linked three articles from three different points during the pandemic indicating that immunity may not be guaranteed, thus supporting my statement.

It's too early to know for sure if immunity is solid or not, obviously, since we're in the middle of the pandemic and testing is just not there. But I didn't make anything up, and I'm not here to argue about whether immunity is guaranteed or not, just to support my statement after being called a liar. This has been an issue talked about throughout the pandemic, which is what I said. I'm not going to go further into the weeds to discuss whether these observations are accurate or not because that's outside my skills. But I do not take well to bring called a liar, so I posted to show that I'm not.

[Dr. Arch]

The updated numbers for COVID-19 in the U.S. are in for 4/26 per: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

I'm keeping track of these updates daily and updating at the end of the day, whenever all states finish reporting for that day.

Δ Change: Day-by-day Growth or Decline or COVID-19 Spread/Deaths.

• IE: Are we flattening the curve enough?

Σ Increase: A day's contribution to overall percentage growth of COVID-19 cases/deaths.

• IE: What's the overall change in the total?

<Last Numbers for 3/26-3/28 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 3/29-4/4 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 4/5-4/11 in this Post>

4/12: <Sunday>

• Cases: 560,323 (+27,444 | Δ Change: ↓10.20% | Σ Increase: ↑5.15%)
• Deaths: 22,108 (+1,531 | Δ Change: ↓17.33% | Σ Increase: ↑7.44%)

4/13:

• Cases: 586,941 (+26,618 | Δ Change: ↓3.01% | Σ Increase: ↑4.75%)
• Deaths: 23,640 (+1,532 | Δ Change: ↑0.07% | Σ Increase: ↑6.93%)

4/14:

• Cases: 613,886 (+26,945 | Δ Change: ↑1.23% | Σ Increase: ↑4.59%)
• Deaths: 26,047 (+2,407 | Δ Change: ↑57.11% | Σ Increase: ↑10.18%)

4/15:

• Cases: 644,089 (+30,203 | Δ Change: ↑12.09% | Σ Increase: ↑4.92%)
• Deaths: 28,529 (+2,482 | Δ Change: ↑3.12% | Σ Increase: ↑9.53%)

4/16: <Missing Older Cases & Deaths Added / Δ Change Calculations Misleading>

• Cases: 677,570 (+33,481 | Σ Increase: ↑5.20%)
• Deaths: 34,617 (+6,088 | Σ Increase: ↑21.34%)

4/17: <Δ Change Calculations Based on 4/15>

• Cases: 709,735 (+32,165 | Δ Change: ↑6.50% | Σ Increase: ↑4.09%)
• Deaths: 37,154 (+2,537 | Δ Change: ↑2.22% | Σ Increase: ↑7.33%)

4/18:

• Cases: 738,830 (+29,095 | Δ Change: ↓9.54% | Σ Increase: ↑4.75%)
• Deaths: 39,014 (+1,860 | Δ Change: ↓26.69% | Σ Increase: ↑5.01%)

4/19: <Sunday>

• Cases: 764,303 (+25,473 | Δ Change: ↓12.45% | Σ Increase: ↑3.45%)
• Deaths: 40,548 (+1,534 | Δ Change: ↓17.53% | Σ Increase: ↑3.93%)

4/20:

• Cases: 792,759 (+28,456 | Δ Change: ↑11.71% | Σ Increase: ↑3.28%)
• Deaths: 42,514 (+1,966 | Δ Change: ↑28.16% | Σ Increase: ↑4.85%)

4/21:

• Cases: 818,744 (+25,985 | Δ Change: ↓8.68% | Σ Increase: ↑3.72%)
• Deaths: 45,318 (+2,804 | Δ Change: ↑42.62% | Σ Increase: ↑6.60%)

4/22:

• Cases: 848,555 (+29,811 | Δ Change: ↑14.72% | Σ Increase: ↑3.64%)
• Deaths: 47,654 (+2,336 | Δ Change: ↓16.69% | Σ Increase: ↑5.15%)

4/23:

• Cases: 880,204 (+31,649 | Δ Change: ↑6.17% | Σ Increase: ↑3.73%)
• Deaths: 49,845 (+2,191 | Δ Change: ↓6.21% | Σ Increase: ↑4.60%)

4/24:

• Cases: 925,038 (+44,834 | Δ Change: ↑41.70% | Σ Increase: ↑5.09%)
• Deaths: 52,185 (+2,340 | Δ Change: ↑6.80% | Σ Increase: ↑4.69%)

4/25 (Yesterday):

• Cases: 960,651 (+35,613 | Δ Change: ↓20.57% | Σ Increase: ↑3.85%)
• Deaths: 54,256 (+2,071 | Δ Change: ↓11.50% | Σ Increase: ↑3.97%)

4/26 (Today): <Sunday>

• Cases: 987,160 (+26,509 | Δ Change: ↓25.56% | Σ Increase: ↑2.76%)
• Deaths: 55,413 (+1,157 | Δ Change: ↓44.13% | Σ Increase: ↑2.13%)

[Dr. Arch]

Since Arch seems to be a little late tonight, here's Nate Silver's summary from earlier today:

https://mobile.twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1254525465592725504

I didn't know that my daily posts were this expected Sorry everyone, they're up now.

[Meclazine for Israel]

OK,

Some new interesting updates from data on Worldometers. Europe definitely heading into the clear as June approaches. Russia, India and Saudi Arabia heading hard into the growth curve.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

UK



UK 26 April - Active Cases
Predicted peak of Active Cases: 84,996 – April 23
Recoveries added to curve – 51,500

UK has been hit hard by the virus. I don't know the UK population compared to the other Euro countries, but they have had a lot of spread according to these numbers.


France



France 26 April - Active Cases
Predicted peak of Active Cases: 59,955 – April 11
Recoveries added to curve – 66,700

France continues to decrease.


Germany



Germany 26 April - Active Cases
Predicted peak of Active Cases: 66,264 – April 6
Recoveries added to curve – 16,400

Probably the most accurate data to model, Germany have had very few inconsistencies in their reporting of data, and this follows the predicted curve very closely. The most organised data reporting during all aspects of the pandemic.


Spain



Spain 26 April - Active Cases
Predicted peak of Active Cases: 78,610 – April 9
Recoveries added to curve – 41,400

Spain just dropped 20,000 recoveries on the Active Case dataset, so I have reduced "Added Recoveries" from 60K down to 40k. It makes no scientific sense to look at the Active Cases without an accurate recovery estimate as seen here:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/spain/

Australia have been reporting recoveries the same way, and Italy have reported virtually no recoveries relative to their case numbers.


Italy



Italy 26 April - Active Cases
Predicted peak of Active Cases: 68,528 – March 30
Recoveries added to curve – 92,000

Italy should be good to go in June based on these numbers. They will soon report a high volume of recoveries in big lumps.


USA



USA 26 April - Active Cases
Predicted peak of Active Cases: 494,087 – April 24
Recoveries added to curve – 322,000

USA on it's way down with a lumpy ride. An expected rise in cases from increased testing will most likely not impact on the curve as recoveries that will arrive from New York and New Jersey in the next week or so.

I cannot predict the right flank width until we get to the minimum of the growth curve in about a week or so. This looks to be about June 10-15 when we get 10% of peak Active Cases, but may skew further depending on the severity of new cases.


Growth Curve

When all the growth curves in Active Cases are plotted together, we get:



All growth curves have been smoothed with 3 point averaging.

Things appear to be quietening down nicely. A couple of eyes needed on USA in the next week to see the impact of increased testing.

[Del Tachi]

1.  The availability of testing is the primary determinant of new case counts, which makes its value as an indicator of the pandemic's progression inherently problematic.  This is mainstream opinion.  U.S. testing capacity has continued to expand and the test-positive rate has declined, suggesting that the level of U.S. testing has sufficiently expanded to keep-up with growth in new cases.

Lmao that's not why your post was so egregiously bad. You tried, in the first week of April, to say that the declining rate of growth in the absolute number of positive cases indicated that we were past peak. Not only was it hilariously untrue that we peaked at the end of March but you literally ignored the fact that there was an increase in the raw number of cases over the prior week and instead opted to herald the fact that we had a decreasing percentage of cases even though this is explained by the fact that the ratio features an increasing denominator.

That level of innumeracy alone is reason to doubt most of what you say.
 

2.  The "worldwide deaths per capita" includes countries where there's practically zero testing, and therefore zero cases and zero deaths attributable to COVID-19.  ~30% of U.S. deaths have been in New York, the U.S. death rate excluding New York is only 120/1M.  Let's compare that to the 67,000/1M in the U.S. who are now U3 unemployed (so it doesn't even include people who have taken reduced hours, stopped looking for work, etc.)  The economic consequences (mostly brought on by lockdowns and other restrictions) of this virus have by far eclipsed the death toll.       

Brilliant analysis. If you exclude New York city then the number of cases per capita in the US goes down. Maybe I was underrating your quantitative instincts before.

Of course, to your point, there is an alternative way to supplement or provide income to these people: give them government assistance! Weird how you never invoke this as an option! It's almost as if you are concern trolling about the economic impact.

Also absolutely ridiculous and unfounded claim that most of the economic damage is due to the lockdowns and not to, uh, a highly contagious and deadly virus which has a high number of asymptomatic carriers. The fact that we saw >5 million people sign up for unemployment insurance before any of these lockdowns were even ordered is obvious evidence for this. The fact that restaurants are still operating and not coming anywhere near standard business levels is evidence for this. The fact that stay at home orders are still overwhelmingly popular by over 2-1 margins is also evidence for this.

I'm sure the response to this is going to be some nonsense claim that "the media" oversensationalized this and convinced people to not order take out at restaurants or some similar nonsense.

3.  The U.S. is not on an Italy-type trajectory.  Outside of a few isolated cases in New York City, hospitals have not had to triage patients.  There was no shortage of ventilators.  Hospital and ICUs across the U.S. are more empty now than they were at the beginning of March.  This, quite frankly, doesn't look like a pandemic in most of the U.S.  Demographic, institutional and cultural differences between the U.S. and Italy go far in explaining why the pandemic's progression has been so different in the two countries.  I don't see how this is a controversial observation.

Uhm... if you look at per-capita case loads by state and compare them to case loads per province in Italy you get rather similar numbers. Just like in the US/NYC, one region (Lombardy) accounting for more cases than the next three hardest-hit regions and has 10x the cases as the sixth largest region (out of 20!) These Italian cases of triaging and shortages were also happening almost exclusively in Lombardy. If "does this feel like a pandemic in the whole country" is your criteria for differentiating the two then it's failing to meet your standard.

Source; data is only two days old.

And that wasn't even the worst part the your post. I was mainly referring to the "success story" part; strange how this catastrophically bad impact on the economy, which was totally avoidable according to you, doesn't stop the US from being a "success story".

4.  All U.S. death statistics rely on state reporting, which necessarily has different standards/lags.  There is no Federal/CDC death count that is independent of what states are reporting.  This is the data we have, and I'm only letting it speak.  All mortality data suggests the elderly are exceptionally more at-risk than <50s, and the chicken littles' obsession with outlier cases and anecdotes is not an accurate representation of what is happening.       

You can let it speak but I still see nothing from you that acknowledges or even indicates that you understand that this data is incomplete (at the time you posted it it had less than half of the total number of fatalities accounted for) and that any inference from it is, to borrow a concept you appear to care about, quite imprecise.

The age-dependent mortality has, of course, been a central feature of reporting since the very beginning. This was a central part of reporting when the virus was still confined to Wuhan! Of course people with pre-conditions are more likely to be elderly; nobody has ever said anything resembling the contrary. To this day I do not understand the point you were trying to make. Of course the weirdest thing about this argument is that it, apparently, presumes that elderly people can only catch the disease from other elderly people... as if there was not a benefit to limiting the number of asymptomatic younger carriers!

1.  Arch's presentation of the numbers was not entirely clear, and after I raised my questions about how to interpret the % change figures he was including in his posts he started listing the daily change and cumulative increase figures separately.  I won't apologize for a brief misunderstanding of the numbers he was presenting, especially when I've contributed no shortage of statistics, data and perspective of my own to the thread.

2.  New York has proven to be an exceptional case.  >30% of American cases/deaths have been in NYS.  In terms of human suffering brought about as a direct consequence of the virus, this is a New York problem.  And New York-style measures are not justified almost anywhere else in the country (and especially not in states like Georgia and Florida, red avatars be damned)   

And the costs of >$2Trn is government assistance is of no-concern?  And even so, no amount of government stimulus (assuming its easy to get, which has not always been the case in these times) can supplement the security afforded by a stable job.  Government bailouts and emergency measures are only temporary stopgaps, and cannot be sustainable long-term strategies the economy.  Fiscal considerations aside, the human costs of the current economic downturn dwarf the suffering brought about as a direct result of deaths/infections/PPE shortages or whatever. 

3.  As has been rehashed one million times, positive case counts are a function of testing.  Italy has done almost 30k tests/1M (which makes sense, they ramped up testing before any other European/NA country) while the U.S. sits at 16k/1M.  The U.S. is not on an Italy-type trajectory in terms of deaths or resource strain.  Italy has almost 3x the deaths/1M as the U.S. does.  The positive case incidence between the two countries is of little concern to me because a) this number is almost entirely a function of testing and b) it says nothing about the divergent outcomes between the two countries, where the U.S. appears to be doing inexorably better despite less restrictive lockdowns/social distancing.

4.  There's no problem using incomplete death counts to talk about age-specific mortality unless there's reason to think death reports from only certain age groups lag more than others.  At any given point in time, an incomplete assessment shouldn't affect the age distribution of deaths because the age of a decadent is irrelevant to when it gets reported.  If you have a reason not to suspect this, please share. 

I really don't understand what you're trying to get out of this exercise.  If you want a blue avatar to kick around, DTT is a much easier target.

[ON Progressive]

If people can't develop immunity, as there have been hints of since the beginning, this may end up fundamentally changing our society. Obviously things won't remain exactly as they are now forever, but there will be significant change from the old "normal."

There have been literally zero hints towards this.

'No Evidence' Yet That Recovered COVID-19 Patients Are Immune, WHO Says
Recovered coronavirus patients are testing positive again. Can you get reinfected?
Questions raised over COVID-19 reinfection after Japanese woman develops illness again

There's tons more, going back to at least mid-March, if my memory serves.

Don't call me a liar. I make sure my opinions are stated as such, and unlike many others, I don't make up information to suit my argument.

Anyway, my point was that we may see masks become part of daily life, as well as other things I can't think of but would be different than how life is now to keep the reproduction number down while the least vulnerable return to work. Life will be different.

I did not call you a liar once, but ignoring that:
1) Your first headline is simply indicating that we don’t have any certainty around immunity, not that we do or don’t have immunity.
2) Those Korean cases are very likely coming from the fact that the PCR swab tests are catching dead virus RNA that isn’t harmful in terms of infectivity or symptoms. This article has a paragraph showing that none of the swabs from “reinfected” patients were able to culture any viruses in a lab, which backs up this.
3) This was debunked weeks ago, and was very likely just a false negative (which swab tests have a high percentage of).

[QAnonKelly]

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

1.  Arch's presentation of the numbers was not entirely clear, and after I raised my questions about how to interpret the % change figures he was including in his posts he started listing the daily change and cumulative increase figures separately.  I won't apologize for a brief misunderstanding of the numbers he was presenting, especially when I've contributed no shortage of statistics, data and perspective of my own to the thread.

Maybe this means you should... think more before you post? The raw case numbers Arch was reporting were increasing that week; very conveniently, you ignored those for the figures that reaffirmed your pre-existing beliefs despite much more clear and obvious data to the contrary.

It's not hard to see why this episode illustrates that your posts deserve to be scrutinized more than apparently you are doing yourself.

And the costs of >$2Trn is government assistance is of no-concern?  And even so, no amount of government stimulus (assuming its easy to get, which has not always been the case in these times) can supplement the security afforded by a stable job.  Government bailouts and emergency measures are only temporary stopgaps, and cannot be sustainable long-term strategies the economy.  Fiscal considerations aside, the human costs of the current economic downturn dwarf the suffering brought about as a direct result of deaths/infections/PPE shortages or whatever.  

There is no serious person who thinks that lockdowns are going to persist beyond the summer, even if that long. Temporary stopgaps to deal with a temporary crisis.

And there's no guarantee (or even evidence to suggest) that spending will resume to January-February/Q4 2019 levels. Consumers are (rightly) spooked and that's percolated upwards to halt economic activity at higher levels. If you're concerned that government spending can't fully revive a person's income, then reopening the economy shouldn't make you feel much better, especially considering the potential lost activity due to workers and consumers becoming reinfected.

4.  There's no problem using incomplete death counts to talk about age-specific mortality unless there's reason to think death reports from only certain age groups lag more than others.  At any given point in time, an incomplete assessment shouldn't affect the age distribution of deaths because the age of a decadent is irrelevant to when it gets reported.  If you have a reason not to suspect this, please share.  

Erm... you acknowledged in your last post that Italy has a very different demographic breakdown than the United States. That is true! It is also true that states (and even counties!) have differing demographics, including wealth and comorbidities. Unless you have evidence that you're getting an unbiased sample of states then your claims are pretty uncertain.

Also, the age of the decedent does potentially influence the reporting probability if older people are dying in nursing facilities and younger patients aren't.

This is why you shouldn't be talking about statistics with authority! You very obviously don't have the training or experience in this type of work to understand the potential reporting biases (et cetera) that you are failing to account for.

I don't think there's any reason to actually doubt the numbers but my point is you're so far out of your depth in trying to interpret studies like this that you don't even understand why you could potentially be wrong. You'd think after being dunked on time and time again in this thread you would learn some humility and lay low, but apparently not so. A person who gets refuted this often and returns to make the same points repeatedly is clearly dealing in bad faith.

I really don't understand what you're trying to get out of this exercise.  If you want a blue avatar to kick around, DTT is a much easier target.

Maybe I'm trying to drill into your head that you are not that smart and you should listen to people who actually know what they are talking about?

e: my other larger point from my initial post is that you make posts which assess the current point in time as not being bad, but those posts age poorly because... the situation doesn't get any better! Maybe your posts about the severity of the pandemic that you made today (when there are 55K confirmed deaths) will age just as poorly as the posts you made a month ago (when there were <5K deaths).

[T'Chenka]

I love the internet so f___ing much.

[GoTfan]

Confirmation that the virus is airborne:

https://health-press.news/2020/04/27/dutch-researchers-from-erasmus-mc-research-confirms-coronavirus-can-be-transferred-via-the-air-endmedia-healthpress-news/

[T'Chenka]

Confirmation that the virus is airborne:

https://health-press.news/2020/04/27/dutch-researchers-from-erasmus-mc-research-confirms-coronavirus-can-be-transferred-via-the-air-endmedia-healthpress-news/

Dude, the article says "via droplets within a meter if the cougher/sneezer/breather descending through the air via gravity", not "aerosol floating in the air for hours"? We already knew this.

You need to calm down and be rational. Or, at least, be rational about this.

[GoTfan]

Confirmation that the virus is airborne:

https://health-press.news/2020/04/27/dutch-researchers-from-erasmus-mc-research-confirms-coronavirus-can-be-transferred-via-the-air-endmedia-healthpress-news/

Dude, the article says "via droplets within a meter if the cougher/sneezer/breather descending through the air via gravity", not "aerosol floating in the air for hours"? We already knew this.

You need to calm down and be rational. Or, at least, be rational about this.

It has also been detected on air pollution particles: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/apr/24/coronavirus-detected-particles-air-pollution