Maybe a bit lower death rate. At best probably kept the hospitals from being overrun because people were in panic mode.
Wu Flu models have proven to be even less accurate than climate change models.
(Didn’t know that was possible.)
I’m wondering what we are going to do with 100k unused respiratory machines. And what does it cost to maintain and keep them calibrated? What a cluster f*.
How many have been going on more than 2 weeks? Given the incubation time it will take a while to actually see effect.
The truth will never be known. While possibly true, the fact that the virus was allowed to spread previously may be the reason their analysis may be flawed, as well.
I am one of your leading FluBros here, and even I have to admit, the logic of that just does not compute.
The metric used is a little hand to understand.
“Mean daily case growth rate” expressed as a percentage. I think that means at the right end of the chart that new cases were still growing at 10% a day (averaged over all the states). But that is inconsistent with the news that new cases are declining, which would be a negative percentage figure. It may be the date of the study — it looks like it ends on April 30.
I look forward to reading the actual paper. Maybe it will be clearer.
Ought O, Dr. Scarf Lady won’t like these findings.
What am I missing here? I believe infection rate is defined as New Cases Today divided by Cumulative Total Cases Yesterday.
I use a 7 day moving average to compare the change in this rate. Here are some numbers:
March 7 48.6%
March 15 32.1%
March 23 38.5%
April 1 18.5%
April 8 10.4%
Trump issued his 15 day plan on March 15. The infection rate grew for the next 8 days to 38.5% and has declined daily since that date. A week is about how long it takes to realize you just might have the Coronavirus.
So you can argue that the rate was coming down naturally but arguing that the rate never changed is just nonsense.
And at the 10% rate we are finding 32,000 new cases every day. And that number is slowly increasing. And we are still under the Trump “quarantine”. That rate, which is falling needs to keep falling.
Reminds me of a paper I once had to grade in which the author was arguing that the Death penalty caused more murders.
Completely contrary to common sense.
Been saying that their evidence that social distancing is working is “anecdotal”. But I guess that’s the “good anecdotal”, not the bad kind like HCQ.
Predicting the effect or lack of effect of lock downs or any non medical policy on Covid-19 has more built in error because of the range of time to show symptoms is wider than with the cold or flu. Longitudinal studies have to have a long enough time line to work. There is a risk that is is too early for a study like this to give any meaningful result.
read it. it looks solid. puzzlement for the researcher at the end though. he apparently expected to see a different result. something like implementation of the lockdowns clearly showed additional decreases in the rates.
sadly for him and for us suffering Americans, it was the opposite, the good effects are more likely due to simple, individual social distancing and hygiene measures taken by reasonable American citizens.
bkmk
Thanks for sharing.
What did they do? Visit an alternate reality?