Replies

The "it's just a flu bro" types are just as ignorant and dangerous as the "it's exponential bro" types, like this doctor.

Let's use some actual data...

As I wrote elsewhere, you'll notice that early on, the rate of growth is quite high. And then, the growth rate tails off and it eventually stops. This is the second half of the curve that the "its exponential, bro" hyperbolists forget.

Now, reasonable people can debate and discuss WHY this curve flattens out - that is, why the lily pads don't eventually overtake the pond. The reality is that while the INHERENT R0 may be greater than 1, once controls are put in place the RESIDUAL R0 is less than 1. In other words, R0 isn't constant...or, more precisely, INHERENT R0 + CONTROLS < 1.

The daily rate of growth in confirmed cases in the US has averaged 43% for all of March; it was 11% prior to March. Therefore, if I consider this chart and project the US confirmed cases as a function of today's count and the rate of growth in Hubei (if you believe their data) from the end of January (which is similar to the US growth rate today), it's likely the US could see 40.5k confirmed cases in one month (April 13).

But then, something wonderful happens. The controls kick in (as they did in Hubei, where the daily growth rate of new cases - if you believe the data - fell below 5% starting on Valentine's Day) and then the curve will flatten out.

Now, 40.5k cases out of 329MM people isn't bad - it is 0.012% of the nation. It is a LARGE number, to be sure, but it is smaller than the entire 67,786 case count for Hubei and the zillions of cases promoted by several 'experts' and resident hysterics.

Now, certainly you'd expect with the entire nation being in lockdown, people obsessively washing hands and elbow bumping, and shifting their entertainment from bar hopping to Netflix streaming, it is possible the 40.5k count may be lower. However, it's fair to ask - is shutting down EVERYTHING a reasonable control? They didn't do it with SARS and we lived...notwithstanding this isn't SARS, IS the impending vaporization of the economy worth it?

I am happy to see a data driven approach. I am also a concerned physician, but not a hand wringing like the orthopod. I am, in fact, a critical care anesthesiologist. I am on the frontline of this.

Further data that we are missing is the seroconversion rate which is of paramount importance. The South Korea numbers suggest that the actual transmitted rate if 5% (Cases (+) / Cases Tested in a highly dense area) and of that the mortalit rate is 0.7% making the population death rate 0.035%.

I saw a thread up the screen a little ways from the concerned doctors who continue to state that this is 10x more fatal than influenza and 8 x more fatal if under 60. I am not sure those numbers track.

Since the beginning we have been told that the "vast majority of cases" will be completely asymptomatic or mild and self limited. This must mean that the N of cases is significantly higher than we have recorded which makes all the current models the worst case scenario

Even in the most vulnerable of age group if you believe the 15% death rate --this means 85% of patients recover. In other words -- the vast majority of even the most endangered population recover

But we do not talk about the facts. And the economic damage is not justified based on these facts. I agree with you entirely, and am glad there is someone who thinks logically and according to facts. My guess? By May 1, back to business as usual. Then the historians can weigh in

That's the idea behind flattening the curve.

However, it's fair to ask - is shutting down EVERYTHING a reasonable control?

We have a second deadly virus/plague in America - Attorneys. Just try not to shut down and if there is any death, impairment, etc., you will be sued and lose.

Is it reasonable to flatten the curve by limiting all groups and petri dishes. Probably.