Data Analysis Indicates the Coronavirus is Slowing

The Gateway Pundit ^ | March 21, 2020 | Jim Hoft

[narses]

Cool, thank you.

[NobleFree]

That's today. Total cases are running at 134% of the previous day's total cases; at that rate, in 4 weeks 0.006% grows to about 24%.

Th total number of cases measured obviously depends on the availability of the tests.

The number of tests that are being made available is growing at a high rate.

A point I already addressed in post #42: "Increased testing has inflated that figure - but testing probably hasn't increased by 34% for ANY day, and certainly hasn't been doing so every day for 2 weeks."

To suggest that the real number of people who have COVID-19 is growing at a 24% from the above data

Not even close to what I said - that 24% is not a rate of growth.

A better way of determining real spread of the disease is to use the number of deaths per day and then multiply that by the estimated death rate.

You mean "divide by." It's a different way, but not clearly better - and total deaths are at 125% of the previous day.

[angry elephant]

Welp, bad news from Washington.

It just reported 269 new cases.

That makes the last two days and today in WA:

189, 149, 269

---

I thought it looked bad, too, when I first saw it.

But it appears that there were 4,000 more tested today where previously there were 2,500 tested per day. I know the plan was to get from testing 2,500 to 4,000 per day and it appears it just happened.

So the extra 1500 tested produced that extra 100 positive.

[NobleFree]

That’s not what the site says now:

March 21 (GMT)
7302 new cases and 84 new deaths in the United States

[NobleFree]

You mean here? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_the_United_States

From those figures, I don’t get a 7-day average less than 29% for any 7-day stretch in the data.

[InterceptPoint]

You are correct. 29.5% is the lowest it got for a 7 day running average. Individual days were both above and below that. But that average is now rising. It was that low for a couple of days. With daily rates now above 40% the average will be rising.

And I am just looking at the data from 3/11 on. But I suspect the average for earlier periods would be quite high.

[FreeReign]

A point I already addressed in post #42: "Increased testing has inflated that figure

Yes.

- but testing probably hasn't increased by 34% for ANY day, and certainly hasn't been doing so every day for 2 weeks."

See graph. Yes it has. The slope is steep.

[FreeReign]

I thought it looked bad, too, when I first saw it. But it appears that there were 4,000 more tested today where previously there were 2,500 tested per day. I know the plan was to get from testing 2,500 to 4,000 per day and it appears it just happened. So the extra 1500 tested produced that extra 100 positive.

Good observation.

And it makes the point I've been making on this thread. Using the number of new cases per day, is not the best way to measure the change in the number of people who are infected.

[Nifster]

Precisely

[NobleFree]

Date	# of cases	7-day average growth
2/26/2020	15
2/27/2020	15
2/28/2020	19
2/29/2020	24
3/1/2020	42
3/2/2020	57
3/3/2020	85
3/4/2020	111	33%
3/5/2020	175	42%
3/6/2020	252	45%
3/7/2020	353	47%
3/8/2020	497	42%
3/9/2020	645	41%
3/10/2020	936	41%
3/11/2020	1205	41%
3/12/2020	1598	37%
3/13/2020	2163	36%
3/14/2020	2825	35%
3/15/2020	3497	32%
3/16/2020	4372	31%
3/17/2020	5656	29%
3/18/2020	8074	31%
3/19/2020	12018	33%
3/20/2020	17438	35%
3/21/2020	23573	35%

[RinaseaofDs]

Ah. Fitting. However, I will say that he hasn’t pulled the trigger on shelter in place, and he could have. I give him credit for that.

[Nifster]

The assumption is incorrect. That’s the point. I understand the term if

I also point out that no virus in history has done that

[Nifster]

“At that rate...”

False assumption

Learn Fars Law

No virus in history has acted that way

Not going to be rough

[NobleFree]

Hmmm ... you're right.

It remains the case that total deaths are running at 125% of the previous day's total deaths. A less discouraging figure, but miles from relax-it's-OK.

[NobleFree]

The assumption is incorrect.

It was never my assumption - any more than when I say "If frogs had wings they wouldn't drag their a**es on the ground" I'm assuming that frogs do have wings.

[InterceptPoint]

Your numbers are probably good. I updated my spreadsheet earlier but it needs it again. I’ve seen updates on data that is 4 days old. That’s life.

And we may have a definition difference. Perhaps. I calculate the rate as (today’s total - yesterday’s total)/yesterday’s total. I don’t use the wiki values. So I’m averaging to at least one decimal place.

[NobleFree]

I calculate the rate as (today’s total - yesterday’s total)/yesterday’s total.

Ditto.

[Balding_Eagle]

My entire post was mockery.

[Nifster]

It is an assumption because it is not a fact

[Nifster]

Thanks for clarifying

My sarcasm sensor may be in need of adjustment. I think it’s calibration has been shifted