The Numbers Dont Work

[mikewhitney]

Do you even understand what the term rate means? I did not miss the post, the post was not based on logic, but an irrational blatherings of a conspiracy minded Christian. G-d gave you an intellect to use, but the intellect needs to be oriented towards truth. Hospital entrances are quiet because the people inside are battling for lives, not to hide truth. Trading truth for lies is something to worry about.

The death rate is at 200 per day in New York City due to Corona virus, in some upstate counties that haven't been hit hard yet is about two dozen. That is a lot of souls. The numbers work

How many need to die before today's isolation policies are appropriate? I will post one comment made on Tweb here:

The last line of my post summarizes the excuses made here by those vigorously downplaying the reality of covid-19, and form a basis of the denialism here.

I have noted that New York and New Jersey are reporting higher death rates with the virus. I have noted then noted that most other states can loosen up on the isolation. The goal of the isolation was to flatten the curve --the loading of hospitals. This was on assumption that the same number of people would eventually be exposed to the virus. If I have this wrong, people can provide a link to show what the plan is.

Apart from New York and New Jersey, the numbers don't work.

[mikewhitney]

Talking about denial I guess many of you will find this one interesting: The U.S. was beset by denial and dysfunction as the coronavirus raged

This is pure hype. Thanks for posting this article and highlighting some things. This at most is a New Jersey and New York issue happening. If we isolate them from the other states, the other states should be fine. The numbers don't work for promoting excessive isolation in the other states. Show how I'm wrong.

[Roy]

Did you just compare the annual rate in the US with the 20-day rate in Germany?

Thanks, Roy. We have someone who has responded to the numbers and not just with hype. If this virus is truly effective for 3 months total and at the same rate, you could multiple the number by 3 -- it may get you to an equivalent annual rate.

First, 3*20 days is less than three months.

Second, and more important, we don't know that the virus is only effective for 3 months. We do know it has been around for more then four months, and we do know that it isn't going to just disappear.

Note that the number at March 18 was about 65. We are at about the end of flu season which may be similar to the end of this virus episode.

That's just hype.

[oxmixmudd]

The infections should not be high at the store since there is minimum pathways for spreading it. People are already told to keep their distance. People already are washing their hands more. We are never guaranteed the idea that the virus will disappear through this. The purpose ostensibly was to slow the spread so that hospitals could handle the load. But California is not overloading the hospitals, nor are many other places.

California, specifically, acted quickly and aggressively early on to reduce spread and control transmission. Their relatively low numbers are simply the consequence of early action. They have similar mortalities as other places. Just lower numbers because the acted quickly to reduce the rate of spread.

[mikewhitney]

California, specifically, acted quickly and aggressively early on to reduce spread and control transmission. Their relatively low numbers are simply the consequence of early action. They have similar mortalities as other places. Just lower numbers because the acted quickly to reduce the rate of spread.

Great. We have done it. We can start loosening the restrictions. The goal was to flatten the curve, not put hospitals out of business.

[oxmixmudd]

This is pure hype. Thanks for posting this article and highlighting some things. This at most is a New Jersey and New York issue happening. If we isolate them from the other states, the other states should be fine. The numbers don't work for promoting excessive isolation in the other states. Show how I'm wrong.

The isolating is not a solution in and of itself. Each state has to act to reduce spread. Isolating NY will only help states with no or very very low infection rates, and only if those states also isolate themselves from all other states with high infection rates

[mikewhitney]

First, 3*20 days is less than three months.

Second, and more important, we don't know that the virus is only effective for 3 months. We do know it has been around for more then four months, and we do know that it isn't going to just disappear.That's just hype.

Great. So we just close down everything and hope that this virus is going to continue for a long time. Meanwhile everyone's economies die. The numbers I gave should be a good guide. If they are not good, we will have to restart the economy with an ongoing virus attack. There are not many logical choices here.

[mikewhitney]

The isolating is not a solution in and of itself. Each state has to act to reduce spread. Isolating NY will only help states with no or very very low infection rates, and only if those states also isolate themselves from all other states with high infection rates

We can reduce spread while returning to our jobs. Otherwise, the numbers don't work

[Roy]

This is pure hype. Thanks for posting this article and highlighting some things. This at most is a New Jersey and New York issue happening. If we isolate them from the other states, the other states should be fine. The numbers don't work for promoting excessive isolation in the other states. Show how I'm wrong.

There are hundreds of known cases in every state. Unless Florida practices some measure of isolation, cutting off NJ and NY will not stop the 15,000 known cases and many more undiagnosed cases in Florida from making Florida just as bad as NY is now.

It is probably too late to prevent this virus from ultimately spreading to almost everyone in the world, just as flu does. It is not too late to reduce the rate at which it spreads so that limited medical resources are not overwhelmed. It seems to be working in California, with the restrictions currently in force.

[oxmixmudd]

We can reduce spread while returning to our jobs. Otherwise, the numbers don't work

As I've pointed out. You are wrong. California's numbers are low because they have taken agressive actions to reduce the spread. If they relax those restrictions right now, they will succumb to a NY scenario. The only way not to overwhelm the hospitals is to keep the rate of spread very low. That simply cant be done if people are interacting closely everyday with a large number of people.

[oxmixmudd]

There are hundreds of known cases in every state. Unless Florida practices some measure of isolation, cutting off NJ and NY will not stop the 15,000 known cases and many more undiagnosed cases in Florida from making Florida just as bad as NY is now.

It is probably too late to prevent this virus from ultimately spreading to almost everyone in the world, just as flu does. It is not too late to reduce the rate at which it spreads so that limited medical resources are not overwhelmed. It seems to be working in California, with the restrictions currently in force.

The other thing reducing the rate of spread does is buy time to create effective treatments and possibly a vaccine.

You know this of course. Just making the point.

[mikewhitney]

There are hundreds of known cases in every state. Unless Florida practices some measure of isolation, cutting off NJ and NY will not stop the 15,000 known cases and many more undiagnosed cases in Florida from making Florida just as bad as NY is now.

It is probably too late to prevent this virus from ultimately spreading to almost everyone in the world, just as flu does. It is not too late to reduce the rate at which it spreads so that limited medical resources are not overwhelmed. It seems to be working in California, with the restrictions currently in force.

The number of cases does not help. This number depends only on the number of people tested combined with the number of people suspected of having this virus. There is not a full view. And the PCR test is not conclusive that a person has the specific COVID-19 virus. There can be other situations that generate a positive result on the test.

The number of cases in California implies that there should be lots more people dead. If the disease has spread too far and cannot be stopped, we have to live with an everlasting disease. There are not any other real choices. This mass isolation is purely theoretical -- no scientific evidence that this was needed or useful now. However, we could exercise a little more caution while also returning to more normal society ... and act like living people.

[mikewhitney]

The other thing reducingvthecrate of spread does is buy time to create effective treatments and possibly a vaccine.

Lovely. The magical vaccine. The vaccine that has not particularly been defined. The need for a vaccine is purely theoretical. We don't know when and if this particular virus will be commonly seen in the future.

Most states have not seen a significant number of deaths from the virus. So, most people may simply be immune or just have low level effects. The numbers don't work.

[oxmixmudd]

The number of cases does not help. This number depends only on the number of people tested combined with the number of people suspected of having this virus. There is not a full view. And the PCR test is not conclusive that a person has the specific COVID-19 virus. There can be other situations that generate a positive result on the test.

The number of cases in California implies that there should be lots more people dead. If the disease has spread too far and cannot be stopped, we have to live with an everlasting disease. There are not any other real choices. This mass isolation is purely theoretical -- no scientific evidence that this was needed or useful now. However, we could exercise a little more caution while also returning to more normal society ... and act like living people.

Actually, no, it hasn't spread too far. The restrictions in place have helped slow the spread. That is why the numbers are low.

[mikewhitney]

Actually, no, it hasn't spread too far. The restrictions in place have helped slow the spread. That is why the numbers are low.

Sure. You know this how?
The problem still is that we cannot live life like this. And this approach for the virus is theoretical. We already tend to know that people were exposed at levels in California that should not be radically different from New York. Like mentioned before, California has hot international tour spots. People would have been infected and dying at high rates here too.

We are projecting severe situations (Italy, New York, Wuhan) onto places where the virus has not had any great number of deaths. Why pursue such isolation on purely speculative grounds?

If you have a way to show that California and other localities are facing the same doom and gloom, show how this works. Show why infections in California has not led to the scary deaths so far.

Otherwise, the numbers don't work.