Bad News Thread

[Bruddah IZ]

Much rather be on team blowhard than on team scared and delusional

Dad4 won’t touch the history of how we’ve dealt with a long history of respiratory diseases like SARs-1. He is comparing Corona numbers and policy to itself. That’s where he loses all statistical credibility. That he feels obligated to opine on public policy is comical.

 

[Grace T.]

Rewatched “contagion” recently. Wondered how it held up after all this. Covid has an r0 originally some where around 1.5 but as high as 4 for variants and an ifr somewhere in the neighborhood of .4% depending on demographics. The disease in the film mutates into an r0 of at least 4 and an ifr of 25%. Ultimately my conclusion based on what’s happened in real life is if the fictional scenario were to happen society would collapse. The film has some suggestions of that: looted markets and banks, garbage collected in the street, the military handing out food. But given that an ifr of what was originally thought to be 2% and people reacted as they did, an ifr anywhere in the neighborhood of the film would have collapsed food oil and power production, overwhelmed the hospitals, caused the collapse of grid systems like the power plumbing and internet infrastructure and caused the military to disintegrate. We got lucky it didn’t hit children hard or we would have lost anyone who had children from the essential workers even in hospital settings. They won’t be able next time to cajole essential workers with nonsense like masks are better than vaccines. The film underestimated the seriousness of collapse such a disease would cause and in our own world had the ifr really been 2% and hit people of all ages we would have gotten close to what we saw in the film. Also note the film underestimated the amount of time needed to make a vaccine and overestimated the amount of time to deploy it.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

Rewatched “contagion” recently. Wondered how it held up after all this. Covid has an r0 originally some where around 1.5 but as high as 4 for variants and an ifr somewhere in the neighborhood of .4% depending on demographics. The disease in the film mutates into an r0 of at least 4 and an ifr of 25%. Ultimately my conclusion based on what’s happened in real life is if the fictional scenario were to happen society would collapse. The film has some suggestions of that: looted markets and banks, garbage collected in the street, the military handing out food. But given that an ifr of what was originally thought to be 2% and people reacted as they did, an ifr anywhere in the neighborhood of the film would have collapsed food oil and power production, overwhelmed the hospitals, caused the collapse of grid systems like the power plumbing and internet infrastructure and caused the military to disintegrate. We got lucky it didn’t hit children hard or we would have lost anyone who had children from the essential workers even in hospital settings. They won’t be able next time to cajole essential workers with nonsense like masks are better than vaccines. The film underestimated the seriousness of collapse such a disease would cause and in our own world had the ifr really been 2% and hit people of all ages we would have gotten close to what we saw in the film. Also note the film underestimated the amount of time needed to make a vaccine and overestimated the amount of time to deploy it.

I'd guess the R0 for the "original" is higher than 1.5 as many people quickly adjusted their behavior. Just a guess. Also, as we have seen, there is a seasonal effect on R0 as well. R0 is a moving target. A cynic might say that is perfect for the purposes of @dad4. Just kidding, dad.

 

[Bruddah IZ]

I'd guess the R0 for the "original" is higher than 1.5 as many people quickly adjusted their behavior. Just a guess. Also, as we have seen, there is a seasonal effect on R0 as well. R0 is a moving target. A cynic might say that is perfect for the purposes of @dad4. Just kidding, dad.

Why wouldn’t it be a moving target if its being compared to itself and not SARs-1?

 

[dad4]

I'd guess the R0 for the "original" is higher than 1.5 as many people quickly adjusted their behavior. Just a guess. Also, as we have seen, there is a seasonal effect on R0 as well. R0 is a moving target. A cynic might say that is perfect for the purposes of @dad4. Just kidding, dad.

The estimates I remember were around R0=3 for wild type covid. 4 or 5 for some of the variants.

Seasonality:
It’s big, but i’m not sure how big. I havent seen a seasonally adjusted set of R0 values. It would help make sense of things. Covid peaked in fall at about 10% infected, and then peaked again in January at around 40% infected. That’s a big jump in R, about 50%: 1.11 to 1.66.

NPI-

The difference between CA under purple rules and CA under orange is also pretty striking. (Team virus won’t like this part.)

Back in January, we had less than 10% vaccinated, winter weather, purple rules, and covid numbers were falling rapidly.
Today, we have 50% vaccinated, spring weather, orange rules, and covid numbers are falling slowly.

The obvious, and unwelcome, conclusion is that the NPI worked. Whatever we were doing in January was worth slightly more than the combined effects of nice weather and an additional 40% vaccinated.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

The estimates I remember were around R0=3 for wild type covid. 4 or 5 for some of the variants.

Seasonality:
It’s big, but i’m not sure how big. I havent seen a seasonally adjusted set of R0 values. It would help make sense of things. Covid peaked in fall at about 10% infected, and then peaked again in January at around 40% infected. That’s a big jump in R, about 50%: 1.11 to 1.66.

NPI-

The difference between CA under purple rules and CA under orange is also pretty striking. (Team virus won’t like this part.)

Back in January, we had less than 10% vaccinated, winter weather, purple rules, and covid numbers were falling rapidly.
Today, we have 50% vaccinated, spring weather, orange rules, and covid numbers are falling slowly.

The obvious, and unwelcome, conclusion is that the NPI worked. Whatever we were doing in January was worth slightly more than the combined effects of nice weather and an additional 40% vaccinated.

By the time we got to January we burned through so many folks here in CA I am not sure how many "spreaders" remained. We had those last pushes over the holidays where there was a lot of travel, then it dropped like a rock. The CA case graph looks strikingly like North Dakota. The faster the cases go up, the faster than come down. What were the NPI in ND?

 

[dad4]

By the time we got to January we burned through so many folks here in CA I am not sure how many "spreaders" remained. We had those last pushes over the holidays where there was a lot of travel, then it dropped like a rock. The CA case graph looks strikingly like North Dakota. The faster the cases go up, the faster than come down. What were the NPI in ND?

The point is more that the percent of available spreaders in May is lower than the percent of available spreaders in January. There is far more immunity now than there was in January. Between vaccines, weather, and acquired immunity, our numbers should be falling a lot faster now than they did in January. Instead, our numbers are falling more slowly: the half life for daily case rate is more than twice what is was back then.

So, something is worse now than it was then. And that something (or somethings) is big enough to offset the three major factors in our favor. NPI seems the most likely candidate. ( The other possibility is a new variant, but such a variant would have to be significantly more transmissible than the high transmission variant LA already went through. Unlikely, but very bad news if that is the case. )

I don’t know what NPI there were in ND, or how you would measure it. My impression is that it was weak and mostly at a very individual level. Some people were choosing to wear masks and/or avoid indoor spaces, some were not. Dropping that would have a smaller impact.

To test the NPi theory, look for states which had major NPI and moderate case rates, and then dropped the NPI, I would expect to see a bump or a decline in the rate of improvement.

 

[Desert Hound]

Back in January, we had less than 10% vaccinated, winter weather, purple rules, and covid numbers were falling rapidly.
Today, we have 50% vaccinated, spring weather, orange rules, and covid numbers are falling slowly.

--

Whatever we were doing in January was worth slightly more than the combined effects of nice weather and an additional 40% vaccinated.

I worry about you. See graphs below.

So, something is worse now than it was then.

Something is worse now vs back in Jan?

In Dec/Jan you were looking at 35-40k new cases per day.

In May CA is at 2500 cases per day.

Something is a LOT better now vs Jan. It is NOT WORSE.


Daily deaths?

CA was at 650 to 700 deaths per day in Jan. Today? mid 60s to occasionally 90s.

That is a substantial improvement.

 

[Desert Hound]

So a few weeks ago Canadian authorities wanted to enter his church. He didn't allow that.

The state would not be denied and arrested him recently.

I guess this is how @dad4 would like to see things done.

I prefer a system where a Constitution limits the power of the government. But that is just me.

By the way funny how the roles have reversed. In the 60s the left was fighting the man. Today? They can't get enough of government rules, intervention, etc.

Canadian Pastor Swarmed and Arrested by 'SWAT' Team for 'Inciting' People to Attend Church

pjmedia.com

 

[Grace T.]

I worry about you. See graphs below.



Something is worse now vs back in Jan?

In Dec/Jan you were looking at 35-40k new cases per day.

In May CA is at 2500 cases per day.

Something is a LOT better now vs Jan. It is NOT WORSE.
View attachment 10711

Daily deaths?

CA was at 650 to 700 deaths per day in Jan. Today? mid 60s to occasionally 90s.

That is a substantial improvement.

View attachment 10712

My assumption was he was being toungein cheek. After all Los Angeles had a mask mandate and indoor dining shut since last may. It shut outdoor dining in early December so clearly shutting outdoor dining is what caused that massive spike. It then opened outdoor dining in late January which obviously caused a slow down in the rate in decline. One can therefore clearly and obviously conclude that government messing around with outdoor dining is what causes changes in cases.

 

[Desert Hound]

Colleagues Silent On CDC Retaliation Against 'Superstar' Scientist

This climate of secrecy, retaliation, and intimidation is not a good look for a supposedly apolitical agency many suspect is scientifically compromised.

thefederalist.com

 

[crush]

So a few weeks ago Canadian authorities wanted to enter his church. He didn't allow that.

The state would not be denied and arrested him recently.

I guess this is how @dad4 would like to see things done.

I prefer a system where a Constitution limits the power of the government. But that is just me.

By the way funny how the roles have reversed. In the 60s the left was fighting the man. Today? They can't get enough of government rules, intervention, etc.

Canadian Pastor Swarmed and Arrested by 'SWAT' Team for 'Inciting' People to Attend Church

pjmedia.com

I got asked and given a mask to put on this morning at grocery store as I was in line to pay. Last night in same shopping center, I got Thai with family to celebrate Mama day and we did not have to wear a mask. I was nice and took the mask but didnt put it on. She goes, "sir, I gave you a mask can you please put it on?" I told her nicely, "no." I also told her not to worry anymore. She started to tear up, and told me, "I dont know what to believe anymore." I told her to fix her eyes on the author of Life and all will go well for you. Fear of death is real folks and this is all about driving fear of death so they can control you. She thanked me and we both gave each other a fist pump. It's starting to get real and when its get real, we will see the truth. What one does with the truth is up to them

 

[crush]

Colleagues Silent On CDC Retaliation Against 'Superstar' Scientist

This climate of secrecy, retaliation, and intimidation is not a good look for a supposedly apolitical agency many suspect is scientifically compromised.

thefederalist.com

Yup, when you speak up Hound on what the real truth is, your true friends will stand by you ((if you have true friends)) and your fair weather friends will bail on you because they aren't true friends.

 

[dad4]

My assumption was he was being toungein cheek. After all Los Angeles had a mask mandate and indoor dining shut since last may. It shut outdoor dining in early December so clearly shutting outdoor dining is what caused that massive spike. It then opened outdoor dining in late January which obviously caused a slow down in the rate in decline. One can therefore clearly and obviously conclude that government messing around with outdoor dining is what causes changes in cases.

Try hound‘s graph on a log scale. Or graph daily cases versus change in daily cases. Or even just look at how many days does it take for case rates to divide by 2.

The percentage rate of decline is worse now than it was in January. It should be considerably better, but it isn’t.

The basic shape of the graph is forced by the logistics equation: P’ = kP(1-P). Daily cases are P’. Total cases are P. It’s a fancy way of saying that the number of new cases depends on how many times an infected person (P) meets an uninfected person. (1-P). This is why all areas have a shape that looks somewhat similar. That graph you are used to seeing is the graph of P’. There is no real way around the basic shape.

My point is that the rate of decline should be improving. Instead, it has gotten worse. The right side of the curve is stretching out further than it ought to.

This can be a conscious decision. We may have decided that the economic and social cost of NPI outweighs the years of life lost among vaccine hold outs and immunocompromised people. It may even have been a decision that NPI are inconsistent with vaccines. (Who will take the vaccine if numbers are already near 0? )

But it is pretty clear evidence that dropping the NPI caused a significant upward shift in transmission.

 

[Grace T.]

The point is more that the percent of available spreaders in May is lower than the percent of available spreaders in January. There is far more immunity now than there was in January. Between vaccines, weather, and acquired immunity, our numbers should be falling a lot faster now than they did in January. Instead, our numbers are falling more slowly: the half life for daily case rate is more than twice what is was back then.

So, something is worse now than it was then. And that something (or somethings) is big enough to offset the three major factors in our favor. NPI seems the most likely candidate. ( The other possibility is a new variant, but such a variant would have to be significantly more transmissible than the high transmission variant LA already went through. Unlikely, but very bad news if that is the case. )

I don’t know what NPI there were in ND, or how you would measure it. My impression is that it was weak and mostly at a very individual level. Some people were choosing to wear masks and/or avoid indoor spaces, some were not. Dropping that would have a smaller impact.

To test the NPi theory, look for states which had major NPI and moderate case rates, and then dropped the NPI, I would expect to see a bump or a decline in the rate of improvement.

Every place in the world that went through a winter or spring wave has this tail to their curve where cases remain plateaued. Spain Italy Czech Republic Texas California Hawaii South Korea. It’s everywhere. More than npi it’s probably mobility (because again it’s impossible for people to lock themselves up a year plus with once weekly takeout unless you are dad4).

even last summer no one went to zero so as long as there are some people who aren’t immune the thing will keep circulating until the threshold (which from India we know now is more than 75%) is reached, if ever (since the thought among many experts is the thing is endemic).

 

[Grace T.]

Try hound‘s graph on a log scale. Or graph daily cases versus change in daily cases. Or even just look at how many days does it take for case rates to divide by 2.

The percentage rate of decline is worse now than it was in January. It should be considerably better, but it isn’t.

The basic shape of the graph is forced by the logistics equation: P’ = kP(1-P). Daily cases are P’. Total cases are P. It’s a fancy way of saying that the number of new cases depends on how many times an infected person (P) meets an uninfected person. (1-P). This is why all areas have a shape that looks somewhat similar. That graph you are used to seeing is the graph of P’. There is no real way around the basic shape.

My point is that the rate of decline should be improving. Instead, it has gotten worse. The right side of the curve is stretching out further than it ought to.

This can be a conscious decision. We may have decided that the economic and social cost of NPI outweighs the years of life lost among vaccine hold outs and immunocompromised people. It may even have been a decision that NPI are inconsistent with vaccines. (Who will take the vaccine if numbers are already near 0? )

But it is pretty clear evidence that dropping the NPI caused a significant upward shift in transmission.

It’s not npi but mobility. You see the same tail in Sweden and Florida for instance.

but in any case this is also where you divorce from reality into math world. If caseskeep slowing they must eventually approach but not reach zero til you get down to one patient or so per week. This runs contrary to the notion that it’s endemic. Reason? You can’t lock up the population in perpetuity and as long as people are circulating and the thing is endemic (meaning there is no herd immunity even at 95% because the thing is constantly mutating) you are always going to see that effect regardless of npis.

 

[crush]

Try hound‘s graph on a log scale. Or graph daily cases versus change in daily cases. Or even just look at how many days does it take for case rates to divide by 2.

The percentage rate of decline is worse now than it was in January. It should be considerably better, but it isn’t.

The basic shape of the graph is forced by the logistics equation: P’ = kP(1-P). Daily cases are P’. Total cases are P. It’s a fancy way of saying that the number of new cases depends on how many times an infected person (P) meets an uninfected person. (1-P). This is why all areas have a shape that looks somewhat similar. That graph you are used to seeing is the graph of P’. There is no real way around the basic shape.

My point is that the rate of decline should be improving. Instead, it has gotten worse. The right side of the curve is stretching out further than it ought to.

This can be a conscious decision. We may have decided that the economic and social cost of NPI outweighs the years of life lost among vaccine hold outs and immunocompromised people. It may even have been a decision that NPI are inconsistent with vaccines. (Who will take the vaccine if numbers are already near 0? )

But it is pretty clear evidence that dropping the NPI caused a significant upward shift in transmission.

Dude, give it up. Seriously, you need help. I told everyone on here a long time ago what this was about.

 

[Desert Hound]

Try hound‘s graph on a log scale. Or graph daily cases versus change in daily cases. Or even just look at how many days does it take for case rates to divide by 2.

The percentage rate of decline is worse now than it was in January. It should be considerably better, but it isn’t.

The basic shape of the graph is forced by the logistics equation: P’ = kP(1-P). Daily cases are P’. Total cases are P. It’s a fancy way of saying that the number of new cases depends on how many times an infected person (P) meets an uninfected person. (1-P). This is why all areas have a shape that looks somewhat similar. That graph you are used to seeing is the graph of P’. There is no real way around the basic shape.

My point is that the rate of decline should be improving. Instead, it has gotten worse. The right side of the curve is stretching out further than it ought to.

This can be a conscious decision. We may have decided that the economic and social cost of NPI outweighs the years of life lost among vaccine hold outs and immunocompromised people. It may even have been a decision that NPI are inconsistent with vaccines. (Who will take the vaccine if numbers are already near 0? )

But it is pretty clear evidence that dropping the NPI caused a significant upward shift in transmission.

The problem is it is not surprising the numbers plateau.

The best case estimate of vaccine effectiveness is 95%. That means even if everyone was vaccinated this thing is floating around and infecting people.

As more get vaccinated the numbers will drop a bit more. However it won't go to zero.
This will be with us for years/decades to come. It is never going to zero.

It has however dropped to a good level.

While you look at the graphs and think we need to be stricter.

The rest of the world looks at the data and think well done. OK we can move on and live life.

We are at the point of diminishing returns. Trying to lock down or limit stuff to push the numbers to zero isn't worthwhile, effective, or even something the vast majority of people will consider.

Most of us look at the numbers and say we are good to go. You for some reason think things still look bad and want more intervention.

The real world is moving on and not willing to try what you prefer.

 

[dad4]

It’s not npi but mobility. You see the same tail in Sweden and Florida for instance.

but in any case this is also where you divorce from reality into math world. If caseskeep slowing they must eventually approach but not reach zero til you get down to one patient or so per week. This runs contrary to the notion that it’s endemic. Reason? You can’t lock up the population in perpetuity and as long as people are circulating and the thing is endemic (meaning there is no herd immunity even at 95% because the thing is constantly mutating) you are always going to see that effect regardless of npis.

Not all mobility drives up cases. More people are going out now. But, if they go out to the local rose garden, it doesn’t drive up cases. It is mobility to indoor locations that matters.

At that point, you’re just playing with semantics. Call it NPI for closing/avoiding the indoor location. Or call it mobility, for going to the indoor location. It’s the same thing.

I do not find the hand-waving assertions about “endemic” to be convincing. There is a lot of ground between 750 deaths per day and “not quite eradicated”. You are using the word “endemic” to make the two sound equal, despite the fact that they are not.

 

[crush]

@dad4 Do you need me to tell you what this is really all about? Where are all the missing kids dad? Where are they? Where is Mr Hanx? Why is Billy getting a divorce? Why did Billy fly around with Jeffrey? Everything will be revealed soon dad.