Bad News Thread

[kickingandscreaming]

Storm definitely threw a monkey wrench into the data.

But the storm doesn’t explain the drift in sequencing results. Nor does the storm explain the level spot in national numbers the last 2 weeks. Or the fact that other countries with high past caseloads (like Brazil) are also seeing an increase.

The simplest explanation for all three is that some variants have a higher transmissibility than others. The same behavior which leads to Rt=0.8 for vanilla covid may mean Rt=1.1 or 1.2 for some of the new variants. (transmission is higher by 35-45% for the UK one.)

So, it isn't the storm. It's the variant. And, if that is correct, the national numbers will go back up over the next 3-4 weeks. (Then drop, as total immunity gets high enough to offset the higher transmissibility.)

Which means this comment is in the correct thread.

It's only been 6 days but the cases don't really support that: "It's the variant." If the variant pushed the graph from falling quickly to concave up and even rising, why has the graph been dropping since Feb 26 and concave down since Feb 24? if the variant is taking over, we would see an acceleration in cases due to the R being > 1. So, maybe it is the Super Bowl effect. That would explain a short bump up then a continued downward, trend that is concave down. I'm not denying that the variant won't eventually take over and may cause a rise in cases, but the data doesn't appear to be supporting that yet.

 

[dad4]

It's only been 6 days but the cases don't really support that: "It's the variant." If the variant pushed the graph from falling quickly to concave up and even rising, why has the graph been dropping since Feb 26 and concave down since Feb 24? if the variant is taking over, we would see an acceleration in cases due to the R being > 1. So, maybe it is the Super Bowl effect. That would explain a short bump up then a continued downward, trend that is concave down. I'm not denying that the variant won't eventually take over and may cause a rise in cases, but the data doesn't appear to be supporting that yet.

View attachment 10321

the NYT has some graphs that break out the variant cases from the normal cases. Variant is still exponentially growing outside of CA. Think of it as two different diseases with two different R. the above graph shows their sum.

It’s roughly similar to 4(0.9)^T + 1(1.1)^T near T=0. first term is regular covid, second term is UK.

the sum slopes down for now, but that will change as the variant grows from 20% to over 50%. 2 weeks?

 

[kickingandscreaming]

the NYT has some graphs that break out the variant cases from the normal cases. Variant is still exponentially growing outside of CA. Think of it as two different diseases with two different R. the above graph shows their sum.

It’s roughly similar to 4(0.9)^T + 1(1.1)^T near T=0. first term is regular covid, second term is UK.

the sum slopes down for now, but that will change as the variant grows from 20% to over 50%. 2 weeks?

This is good stuff - and I understand it. My point was simply that the "bump" we saw isn't supported by the variant taking over as once it takes over, it should accelerate overall cases. The fact that the growth didn't increase and actually started to fall again indicates the bump-up was caused by something else.

 

[crush]

I woke

 

[kickingandscreaming]

Quick analysis of b.1.117 (UK variant), and the next 2 months.

Nationally- number of cases is doubling a bit faster than once per two weeks. (R = 1.4 or so.). Currently at 15K or so cases per day. Expect it to continue doubling until vaccines cover enough additional people to counteract the higher R. That is, we need to vaccinate 4/14 of those who are not yet immune. 2/7 x .84 = another 24% of the country. 80 M more people vaccinated. 2 months before it turns around for vaccines. 4 more doublings. 120K cases per day peak.

Big things I missed: 1- recovered b.1.117 cases will bring the peak lower. 2- Any vaccinations will slow the doubling, even if we don’t get to 80M more. 3- Over excited reopening will make the peak go higher. I am treating these as offsetting each other, but I suspect the third factor is bigger than the first or second.

California- b.1.117 has stalled at 15% of cases. Dad guess is that b.1.117 can’t make further inroads because it isn’t much stronger than the already dominant LA variant. If true, it means CA won’t have a b.1.117 peak. However, CA is opening dining, theaters, and stadiums, so expect case counts to remain high for a while. Case counts can’t go up too far without putting us back in purple and closing it all down again.

So, another national peak in the 100K-150K cases per day range. CA hanging out at the red/purple boundary. (Cases go down, open something stupid. Our stupid thing forces cases back up, close down the stupid. Repeat.)

Be glad the line for soccer is at 14 instead of at yellow. With dining open, I am no longer optimistic that we can hit yellow this spring.

(again, not an epidemiologist. So don’t take this too seriously.)

This is very interesting data, @dad4. Thanks for posting it. After some sleep and coffee, I have some “I’m not an epidemiologist and I didn’t even stay in a Holiday Inn Express” thoughts.

What is the population distribution for the variant? The distribution of the population who are susceptible to the virus has changed dramatically with the vaccine. While the case rate is important, it is much less important than the rate of death and hospitalization. Since last Tuesday, AZ was vaccinating 55 and older. Nationally, 80% of the deaths have come from 65 and older. So, as long as we are “spitballing”, let’s say 70% of those over 65 got a vaccine and it protects them from serious illness 90% of the time (that may be high for older folks).

% of 65 and older protected from serious illness = 0.7*0.9 = 0.63 —> 0.37 of over 65’s can still get a “serious” infection

So, where we would normally expect 80 deaths of the 100 total, we get 0.37*80 or about 30 deaths. This effectively cuts the rate of death by 50%. There is a belief that the variant is more deadly. My guess is, as with most initial numbers on the disease, they are overestimating considerably. Let’s say it’s 20% more. That would raise deaths to 1.2*30 = 36 and the effective drop is 44%, not 50%. Of course, the percent of olders getting vaccinated is increasing daily. Once we get to all the 55 year olds, that’s about 90% of the deaths. I’m calling this a wash given the numbers of the variant are still relatively low. You also mention that you have a constant “doubling” every two weeks and that will obviously slow with vaccinations.

On the “bad” end, as you state, behavior can change effective R. I tend to be optimistic that this will not be a significant factor. I believe most people’s behavior is pretty much “baked-in” and not subject to external restrictions as much as those who make the restrictions would like to believe. People that want to get the vaccine (about 2/3?) will likely be cautious until they get it. Those willing to be involved in riskier behaviors are already doing so. Unfortunately, the variant will likely affect the poorer, more crowded areas even more inordinately than the initial strain. To begin with, the virus is spreading faster there - at least in our home area - and those folks appear to be getting vaccinated at a lower rate than the population.

One other thought. The variant will likely run through the younger population at a much higher rate than the original virus as they are vaccinated at a much lower rate.

 

[Grace T.]

This is very interesting data, @dad4. Thanks for posting it. After some sleep and coffee, I have some “I’m not an epidemiologist and I didn’t even stay in a Holiday Inn Express” thoughts.

What is the population distribution for the variant? The distribution of the population who are susceptible to the virus has changed dramatically with the vaccine. While the case rate is important, it is much less important than the rate of death and hospitalization. Since last Tuesday, AZ was vaccinating 55 and older. Nationally, 80% of the deaths have come from 65 and older. So, as long as we are “spitballing”, let’s say 70% of those over 65 got a vaccine and it protects them from serious illness 90% of the time (that may be high for older folks).

% of 65 and older protected from serious illness = 0.7*0.9 = 0.63 —> 0.37 of over 65’s can still get a “serious” infection

So, where we would normally expect 80 deaths of the 100 total, we get 0.37*80 or about 30 deaths. This effectively cuts the rate of death by 50%. There is a belief that the variant is more deadly. My guess is, as with most initial numbers on the disease, they are overestimating considerably. Let’s say it’s 20% more. That would raise deaths to 1.2*30 = 36 and the effective drop is 44%, not 50%. Of course, the percent of olders getting vaccinated is increasing daily. Once we get to all the 55 year olds, that’s about 90% of the deaths. I’m calling this a wash given the numbers of the variant are still relatively low. You also mention that you have a constant “doubling” every two weeks and that will obviously slow with vaccinations.

On the “bad” end, as you state, behavior can change effective R. I tend to be optimistic that this will not be a significant factor. I believe most people’s behavior is pretty much “baked-in” and not subject to external restrictions as much as those who make the restrictions would like to believe. People that want to get the vaccine (about 2/3?) will likely be cautious until they get it. Those willing to be involved in riskier behaviors are already doing so. Unfortunately, the variant will likely affect the poorer, more crowded areas even more inordinately than the initial strain. To begin with, the virus is spreading faster there - at least in our home area - and those folks appear to be getting vaccinated at a lower rate than the population.

One other thought. The variant will likely run through the younger population at a much higher rate than the original virus as they are vaccinated at a much lower rate.

By May, the death rate is on the floor. The emergency will be effectively over ( at least until fall when some of the variants may have gotten away from the vaccine and even then the vaccine seems to help against death/serious illness at least so far). The question then is do we allow cases to continue to drive policy, even though by then the death rate is essentially that of a moderately bad flu season

 

[dad4]

By May, the death rate is on the floor. The emergency will be effectively over ( at least until fall when some of the variants may have gotten away from the vaccine and even then the vaccine seems to help against death/serious illness at least so far). The question then is do we allow cases to continue to drive policy, even though by then the death rate is essentially that of a moderately bad flu season

If case rates had no consequences, then you could drop all precautions.

However, running high case rates over summer also means that you are creating more new variants.

The more new variants you make, the higher the probability that one of them is seriously immune to the vaccine. Which would put us right back where we were in Feb 2020.

I'd really rather not do that.

Not that I have any choice. We seem to be dropping masks and opening up right now, even though we still have 1500 deaths per day.

At least we have priorities straight. Classes are by zoom, but I can eat at my favorite restaurant. Makes sense if my children hope to wait tables at Denny's some day.

 

[Desert Hound]

At least we have priorities straight. Classes are by zoom, but I can eat at my favorite restaurant. Makes sense if my children hope to wait tables at Denny's some day

Quite a few states have kids in school. Mine have been full time in person since the end of Aug.

Your stuck with bad leadership and powerful unions.

 

[Grace T.]

If case rates had no consequences, then you could drop all precautions.

However, running high case rates over summer also means that you are creating more new variants.

The more new variants you make, the higher the probability that one of them is seriously immune to the vaccine. Which would put us right back where we were in Feb 2020.

I'd really rather not do that.

Not that I have any choice. We seem to be dropping masks and opening up right now, even though we still have 1500 deaths per day.

At least we have priorities straight. Classes are by zoom, but I can eat at my favorite restaurant. Makes sense if my children hope to wait tables at Denny's some day.

Meh. This might be a serious concern if the rest of the world could get its act together regarding the vaccine. But there appear to be problems with both the Russian and China vaccines. The EU has been having a very had time with vaccinations and now has a third wave. And the vaccination in the third world is even more of a s show. It's going to come down to the US having to donate vaccines around the world. So it's sort of irrelevant what we do here...if there's a variant that pops up it has plenty of room to do it outside the US. The only way your argument flies is if we hard shut the US border, but not only have international airflights upticked, the southern border is increasingly becoming problematic. What you are talking about is basically shutting the barn after the horses have already escaped. Part of the world won't be vaccinated for 2-3 years....polio should have been eliminated years ago....we can't even do that.

p.s. doubt we'll be running "high" case rates over the summer due to seasonality, though I acknowledge our definitions of "high" vary greatly between us.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

If case rates had no consequences, then you could drop all precautions.

However, running high case rates over summer also means that you are creating more new variants.

The more new variants you make, the higher the probability that one of them is seriously immune to the vaccine. Which would put us right back where we were in Feb 2020.

I'd really rather not do that.

Not that I have any choice. We seem to be dropping masks and opening up right now, even though we still have 1500 deaths per day.

At least we have priorities straight. Classes are by zoom, but I can eat at my favorite restaurant. Makes sense if my children hope to wait tables at Denny's some day.

Ha! This is funny. Not your post, @dad4. I was just ready to say that I'd guess the argument from the "zero-risk" folks will be that the higher the rate that virus is still going around, the risk of variants is higher. I don't have to guess anymore. I get the argument, I just don't believe it makes sense to live like this for 1.5 years and going. The sad thing is, that if they didn't attempt the indefinite lockdowns, they might have actually had a chance at convincing people to lock down pretty tight for a few weeks when things got bad. That ship has sailed.

You aren't going to get your way, @dad4. The unions are too strong and enough of the general population doesn't believe indefinitely sacrificing for this virus. (Flatten the curve, anyone?). Have you considered Australia, New Zealand, or South Korea? Those are your best bet for your approach.

 

[dad4]

Ha! This is funny. Not your post, @dad4. I was just ready to say that I'd guess the argument from the "zero-risk" folks will be that the higher the rate that virus is still going around, the risk of variants is higher. I don't have to guess anymore. I get the argument, I just don't believe it makes sense to live like this for 1.5 years and going. The sad thing is, that if they didn't attempt the indefinite lockdowns, they might have actually had a chance at convincing people to lock down pretty tight for a few weeks when things got bad. That ship has sailed.

You aren't going to get your way, @dad4. The unions are too strong and enough of the general population doesn't believe indefinitely sacrificing for this virus. (Flatten the curve, anyone?). Have you considered Australia, New Zealand, or South Korea? Those are your best bet for your approach.

As you said, I don't have a choice.

It’s not really a question of infinite lockdowns. That term has become all but meaningless, anyway. We now call it a lockdown if our favorite restaurant is limited to 75% capacity. Even wearing a mask is untenable in large parts of the country.

Moving internationally? No. But AU/SK/NZ are looking a lot smarter than we are at the moment. Per capita, we still have more covid deaths per day than NZ has had total.

Yet we still have fools talking about how they think it was inevitable. It wasn’t inevitable. We just had 1/3 of the country fighting on the side of the virus.

 

[Grace T.]

As you said, I don't have a choice.

It’s not really a question of infinite lockdowns. That term has become all but meaningless, anyway. We now call it a lockdown if our favorite restaurant is limited to 75% capacity. Even wearing a mask is untenable in large parts of the country.

Moving internationally? No. But AU/SK/NZ are looking a lot smarter than we are at the moment. Per capita, we still have more covid deaths per day than NZ has had total.

Yet we still have fools talking about how they think it was inevitable. It wasn’t inevitable. We just had 1/3 of the country fighting on the side of the virus.

Wow it’s just really shocking you think still at this late date we could have actually controlled it. Your arguments about masks variants and indoor dining are all well thought out and reasonable even if we disagree on points. But you are in major denial and out in fantasyland if you, after all this, think it wasn’t inevitable. I mean even Germany after all that couldn’t control it. Even Japan.

The world lost this fight the moment China lied about the data. South Korea and Taiwan were able to do what they did because they didn’t believe the Chinese. New Zealand because it’s just very remote. Australia through some really hard core steps including leaving its citizens overseas stranded and doing stuff which here is patently unconstitutional and a little luck in containing the cruise ship outbreak helped by some seasonality. And then there’s places like China Vietnam and Singapore. That’s the list.

We couldn’t even shut our borders or control protests that shattered the lockdown consensus and when trump tried partial restrictions on air flights and the border he was pilloried.

 

[met61]

To make this an objective experiment, one would also have to show the result on a vulnerable population that mostly didn't wear masks.

Provide the objective counter.

 

[Grace T.]

Wow it’s just really shocking you think still at this late date we could have actually controlled it. Your arguments about masks variants and indoor dining are all well thought out and reasonable even if we disagree on points. But you are in major denial and out in fantasyland if you, after all this, think it wasn’t inevitable. I mean even Germany after all that couldn’t control it. Even Japan.

The world lost this fight the moment China lied about the data. South Korea and Taiwan were able to do what they did because they didn’t believe the Chinese. New Zealand because it’s just very remote. Australia through some really hard core steps including leaving its citizens overseas stranded and doing stuff which here is patently unconstitutional and a little luck in containing the cruise ship outbreak helped by some seasonality. And then there’s places like China Vietnam and Singapore. That’s the list.

We couldn’t even shut our borders or control protests that shattered the lockdown consensus and when trump tried partial restrictions on air flights and the border he was pilloried.

Btw even south koreas “control” is questionable. They resorted to business closures, forced quarantines and testing, family separations and border controls and still are plateaued at 500 cases per day. Well better than the rest of the world but hardly controlled.

 

[dad4]

Meh. This might be a serious concern if the rest of the world could get its act together regarding the vaccine. But there appear to be problems with both the Russian and China vaccines. The EU has been having a very had time with vaccinations and now has a third wave. And the vaccination in the third world is even more of a s show. It's going to come down to the US having to donate vaccines around the world. So it's sort of irrelevant what we do here...if there's a variant that pops up it has plenty of room to do it outside the US. The only way your argument flies is if we hard shut the US border, but not only have international airflights upticked, the southern border is increasingly becoming problematic. What you are talking about is basically shutting the barn after the horses have already escaped. Part of the world won't be vaccinated for 2-3 years....polio should have been eliminated years ago....we can't even do that.

p.s. doubt we'll be running "high" case rates over the summer due to seasonality, though I acknowledge our definitions of "high" vary greatly between us.

I was thinking about international sources of variants as I wrote it, but decided not to make it complicated.

The real question is which places will cause vaccine resistant variants. To make a vaccine resistant variant, you need to have high case rates at the same time as you have moderately high vaccination rates. Right now, that sounds like USA more than anywhere else.

Opening up before we vaccinate will just make it that much more likely.

 

[Grace T.]

I was thinking about international sources of variants as I wrote it, but decided not to make it complicated.

The real question is which places will cause vaccine resistant variants. To make a vaccine resistant variant, you need to have high case rates at the same time as you have moderately high vaccination rates. Right now, that sounds like USA more than anywhere else.

Opening up before we vaccinate will just make it that much more likely.

Isn’t the sa variant vaccine resistant despite not having much of a vaccination rate to speak of at all? Sure I can see where evolution would help this along....life finds a way to survive...but you’d expect this in places also with a high natural immunity as well since the evolutionary pressure is the same. Then there’s also the species crossover danger....we dodged bullets with felines and minks but it’s also only a matter of time. Life will find a way

 

[met61]

As you said, I don't have a choice.

It’s not really a question of infinite lockdowns. That term has become all but meaningless, anyway. We now call it a lockdown if our favorite restaurant is limited to 75% capacity. Even wearing a mask is untenable in large parts of the country.

Moving internationally? No. But AU/SK/NZ are looking a lot smarter than we are at the moment. Per capita, we still have more covid deaths per day than NZ has had total.

Yet we still have fools talking about how they think it was inevitable. It wasn’t inevitable. We just had 1/3 of the country fighting on the side of the virus.

Speaking of fools.

New CDC Report:


The results are inside the margin for statistical error.

 

[Grace T.]

Speaking of fools.

New CDC Report:
View attachment 10330

The results are inside the margin for statistical error.

Yeah I thought about bring up this critique too of the cdc mask study but I already know his answer: that small .5% compounds over time. That study has a lot of problems with selectivity and reference periods and methodology and didn’t even study the most interesting time period. It didn’t even try and present the counter factual and qualifications but despite putting a huge thumb on the scale that’s the best they could come up with. As a result the effect is probably overstated by the study making an even small result smaller. But we’ve pretty much known this all along...masks help a little...not enough to make a substantial difference, certainly not enough to control the outbreak and certainly not better than vaccines or 6-8 weeks of masking and covid disappeared. The biggest problem with the masks as religion school is they oversold the effectiveness thus creating bad secondary effects.

 

[Grace T.]

Yeah I thought about bring up this critique too of the cdc mask study but I already know his answer: that small .5% compounds over time. That study has a lot of problems with selectivity and reference periods and methodology and didn’t even study the most interesting time period. It didn’t even try and present the counter factual and qualifications but despite putting a huge thumb on the scale that’s the best they could come up with. As a result the effect is probably overstated by the study making an even small result smaller. But we’ve pretty much known this all along...masks help a little...not enough to make a substantial difference, certainly not enough to control the outbreak and certainly not better than vaccines or 6-8 weeks of masking and covid disappeared. The biggest problem with the masks as religion school is they oversold the effectiveness thus creating bad secondary effects.

Ps. My absolute favorite covid moment in all this was arguing with my sons school sport director who wanted him to take a covid test for 1 1 hour soccer practice: my argument to him was they are distanced, outdoors and in masks. “The cdc director said masks are better than vaccines so what are you worried about”. It was super sweet.

 

[met61]

Yeah I thought about bring up this critique too of the cdc mask study but I already know his answer: that small .5% compounds over time. That study has a lot of problems with selectivity and reference periods and methodology and didn’t even study the most interesting time period. It didn’t even try and present the counter factual and qualifications but despite putting a huge thumb on the scale that’s the best they could come up with. As a result the effect is probably overstated by the study making an even small result smaller. But we’ve pretty much known this all along...masks help a little...not enough to make a substantial difference, certainly not enough to control the outbreak and certainly not better than vaccines or 6-8 weeks of masking and covid disappeared. The biggest problem with the masks as religion school is they oversold the effectiveness thus creating bad secondary effects.

Yet when convenient they drive policy, political & media narratives and power grabs. Amazed at how many gobble it up and surrender freedoms so willingly.