Posted on 03/30/2020 3:04:22 AM PDT by DoughtyOne
Please FReep Mail me regarding the ping list
for these reports. Thanks.
COVID-19 Update
As of 03/29/2020 23:08 PDT (taken at 23:59)
Editor's note:
The data source I was using bombed out on me for a good
portion of a single day. When it did, it added in and
deleted a number of reporting entities. The housekeeping
to keep the data sound was pretty heavy for about five
days. We're talking about them adding in seven accounts
and deleting two or three per each report. And then there
was the issue of their data being able to pass my check
sum data verification protocols. It made it hard to keep
the data going, and communicate anything of value out.
At this same time, things were heating up in the United
States, and I'll be honest. There was no good news to
report. Lets start off this morning and you'll quickly
see what drew my focus and inspired concerns.
To the report then...
This information addresses solely the United States.
Early on in March, I followed the Numbers for the United
States. Within days I was seeing warning signs that had
me concerned.
Starting on the first of March, the growth rates per day
were 20% and above. While that wasn'too much of a conern
for 80 to 105 cases, it did become a concern when by the
5th of the month the numbers of 159 to 338 grew at 46.54%
and 45.06% in two days.
I had seen how fast numbers could grow from 200 on, and
those growth percentages told me we would see massive
numbers in days, if the increase remated at those same
rates.
Within days after that, it became clear the United States
figures were going to continue to grow at percentages I was
not comfortable with. None of us would have been comfortable
with them.
Let's look at the growth levels during March. Here is a
breakdown of the growth levels for the first four weeks.
00 Day(s) 00.01% to 10.00%
02 Day(s) 10.01% to 20.00%
13 Day(s) 20.01% to 30.00%
09 Day(s) 30.01% to 40.00%
03 Day(s) 40.01% to 50.00%
01 Day(s) 50.01% to 60.00%
Out of the first 28 days of March, only two days came
in under 20%. During that same period 26 out of 28 came
in with growth of over 20%. 13 came in with growth
between 20 and 30%. 9 came in between 30 and 40%. 3
came in with growth between 40 and 50%, and one had growth
over 50%.
With that growth rate going on, we grew from 79 cases on
02/29 to 124,665 cases on the 28th.
Here's something that began to concern me also. The United
States contains a small 4.252% of the global populace. As
of the 29th, we have 19.762% of the global declared cases.
Not only that, if you look at active cases, we account for
24.29% of all global active cases.
The bad news: Over the last week our number of cases, has
looked like this.
EOD Day's
Date Cases Grwth
03/22 33,206 8,459
03/23 46,442 11,236
03/24 54,893 8,789
03/25 60,197 13,966
03/26 85,991 16,794
03/27 104,839 18,848
03/28 124,665 19,826
Looks pretty bad doesn't it. Well, it isn't totally
Lets look at it again, and you'll see why numbers
are important, and why even bad numbers can be
grounds for a better outlook. Lets see if you
noticed.
EOD Day's Size of
Date Cases Grwth Gain (last four days)
03/22 33,206 8,459
03/23 46,442 11,236
03/24 54,893 8,789
03/25 60,197 13,966 5,177
03/26 85,991 16,794 2,828
03/27 104,839 18,848 2,054
03/28 124,665 19,826 978
While the growth was still going up by massive numbers,
To put that into perspective, for the weeks prior, each
day's growth number had been growing. One day the amount
would grow by 500, the next by 1,000, the next by 2,000,
the next by 3,500 and so on. So the growth was
excellerating. Each day the increase in the counts were
going up by larger margins. So if the numbers were
beginning to go up by less amounts each day, that would be
significant.
I held off mentioning this because I wasn't sure the trend
was valid. By all rights it should have been with four
days in a row shedding the strength of growth. So last
night I decided to give it one more day.
I am pleased to present growth that is not only smaller
than growth the day before over the last four days, but
yesterday the growth actually went down, not up. It was
not just growing at lower rate, it was actually shrinking
in the amount the numbers were growing by.
My wording might be confusing, but here are the numbers.
...with 03/29 added in:
EOD Day's Size of
Date Cases Grwth Gain
03/22 33,206 8,459
03/23 46,442 11,236
03/24 54,893 8,789
03/25 60,197 13,966 5,177
03/26 85,991 16,794 2,828
03/27 104,839 18,848 2,054
03/28 124,665 19,826 978
03/29 143,025 18,360 -1,466
This hints that in days just ahead, the new cases will
In a few days we will be resolving cases in the United
States by over 5,000 per day, and that will increase to
over 10,000 per day for a short period of time.
If we look back at 14 days, we see large numbers of cases
being declared. Now it's time for a large number of them
to be declared recovered.
Someone wanted to know about Fatalities:
Per
Date Fatal Day
03/26/20 1,301
03/27/20 1,704 403
03/28/20 2,229 525
03/29/20 2,484 255
I had another hickup from my date provider. This
I think the important thing to focus on here, is that
we have over 143,000 cases in the U. S. We hear all
sorts of terrible stories. On first blush, it's
tempting to let your fears take charge. At the end
of the day, with 143,000 people fighting this in the
U. S., we're simply not hearing of the massive instances
of death that some folks were sure were going to befall
us.
In summation of what I have discussed here, indications
are that better times are just ahead. There will be areas
where new cases will flare, but I'm pretty sure we're
nearing a point where we can safely say we've seen the
worst of it. Can I definitively promise that? Not really.
Anything can happen, but right now things are definitely
looking better. We'll see if that holds.
This addresses the situation outside Mainland China.
Much of the informaiton I revealed about things looking
better in the U. S., also apply to the international
scene. The velocity of growth there has also slowed
EOD Day's Size of
Date Cases Grwth Growth
03/24/20 341,530 41,462
03/25/20 390,378 48,848 7,386
03/26/20 451,006 60,628 11,780
03/27/20 516,124 65,118 4,490
03/28/20 583,107 66,983 1,865
03/29/20 641,588 58,481 -8,502
As the increase in declared cases dies off, the numbers
Of the global cases that have been declared, a
certain percentage of them have been resolved. On 03/07/20
at 18:03, 59.918% of global cases had been resolved, but
then the Outside China cases took off. The day before
yesterday the closing figure was 25.720% of global cases
resolved. Today that number grew shrank by 0.012%, to
rest at 25.708%.
The reason I mention this, is because that number has
been dropping by more than 3.00% on some days in the last
few weeks. The fact that it only changed by 0.012%
yesterday, is a big deal. It means things are changing.
The number of active cases start receeding again in the
not too distant future.
14,983 cases were resolved yesterday. Compared to
the big numbers we have been adding over the last few
days, that doesn't sound like much. The fact of the
matter is though, it's more than 25.000% of the day's
increased documented cases. That will bring the
percentage of resolved cases up. That's a start.
As the percentage grows, the number of active cases
shrinks. We seem to be headed to an increased
percentage of resolved cases if not tomorrow then
most likely a day or so after that. That may be a
bit premature, but that's where we are headed,
considering the numbers.
It also appears to me that we may start seeing a
decline in active cases within 5-10 days. That's a
bit premature to predict also, but it's not out of
the question at this point.
This presents how many people are represented by one
case in these entities:
Globally : 14,451 Mainland China: 440,280 Outside China : 14,536 The U. S. A. : 2,430Yes, we still have our work cut out for us.
Good morning...
All data below sourced from Johns Hopkins University: LINK
I have been downloading three to five reports per
day since 01/27. I have then worked up numbers that
should give a very good representation of numbers that
have been provided to the public via that site.
In my spreadsheet linked below, you'll find global
numbers including China. You will find a separate
section addressing just the Outside China figures.
Then there is now also a section with just the
United States stats in there. There are also a lot
of special stats broken out for you to browse. The
history of 203 nations and their numbers from day one
of their reporting.
You're welcome to it.
COVID-19 Spreadsheet using JHU data
Sorry, the XLS version is not available for dibursement at this time.a
ping
New York deaths were almost half on Sunday what they were Saturday.
So in your opinion the curve is no longer exponential?
CC
Thanks. Glad to hear that.
Would certainly like to see that continue.
You’re looking at new cases. Look at # new deaths daily. Far better data.
If you start with two assumptions, the data is coming from a biological system, is “normally distributed” and secondly, our mitigation efforts have been perfect for two weeks, the trend in the baseline should be on a downward slope. So, the variance in the last two days has been between 525, and 260 or whatever. In order to continue to “average out” and stay on a downward trend the recent data would have to be compensated for by a few days of “negative numbers”. People would, statistically, have to be “coming back to life” which is a curious thought.
I look a them also.
Strangely enough, these viruses don't seem to achieve that goal.
At some point, they get tired. I know that sounds silly, but
I can't think of a better explanation for it.
They stop advancing long before the total population is infected.
What I am seeing, is five days of activity where forces were
moving in the direction of smaller growth in cases.
I see cases continue to increase for the short term, but
they will grow by smaller margins.
I do not think things are moving exponentially at this point.
Your criteria for labeling it exponential may be different
than mine, and you may still see it as growing
exponentially. And technically, if the definition is met,
I wouldn't have a problem with it being addressed in those
terms.
It takes new cases to sustain deaths.
If cases grow at a smaller rate and active cases begin to
drop, deaths are impacted negatively.
This is why I address the dynamics of new cases.
You are looking at downstream considerations. “The Herd.” I have been a clinician. My only interest has always been “The Patient”.
Read Raoult’s paper, 80 patients. 3 progressed to “severe” (ICU) on treatment. One died. N= too small for sure but compared with “best medical care” doesn’t look promising as far as mortality is concerned. But reduced burden on healthcare may be worthwhile.
To me it’s best to track the disease.
Once people have the disease, those numbers will
take care of themselves.
No infection. No deaths. Trends in disease
growth or spread, lets us know there is still a
threat. Fighting the growth of that threat
results in fewer deaths.
The spread of the disease is what matters overall.
I don’t care to see people die, but by tracking
the volume and velocity of new cases, I can
determine a threat level.
Tracking deaths tells me nothing.
Right now I can tell you it looks like there
will be fewer new cases ahead, and that bodes
well for the populace, and fewer deaths.
I would be looking at treatments.
There are several promising treatments out there.
Getting those online ASAP will save lives.
# of new deaths constitutes far better data, but number of new cases has a smaller time lag. Both are worth looking at, but I’m glad he decided to focus on leading indicators.
Thank you. You have moved mountains of data. What a monumental effort.
I understand better why we are still asked to self isolate for another month. We need to give the process time to evolve while exposing as few more people as possible. Like the inhabitants of Noah’s boat we must wait for the dove with a morsel of leaf in her beak to signal our emergence back to the dry land.
Following new cases could lead to good decisions, we could be “testing so many people” the data is accurate enough. I wasn’t an epidemiologist. Not a “Herd Doctor”. If I’m going to be treating patients I want to know what will help this patient in front of me.
And the treatments are? New technology drugs are still in R&D. Old fashioned “gamma globulin” would be terribly costly, I suspect.
I honestly think we should have been testing in early
January, in massive numbers.
If we would have done that, we would have isolated people
when it really counted.
It’s my opinion that by the time we did start testing, we had
tens of thousands of people out there spreading the disease,
while we were trying to isolate the few identified cases.
Way too late...
If I understand correctly there really wasn’t a good test at first. Apparently, the test they had had huge False Negatives because it was designed to be “Specific” not “Sensitive”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.