TPS

Sarcasm for those who diss experts...

Based on those numbers provided, the change in cases starting from March 18th through 22nd (the numbers for 3/23 were not for full day) are: 4469 (3/19) 5534 6977 8536 (3/22) The number of new cases have not "remained about the same." Estimating the growth rate of total cases (starting on 3/12 to 3/22), it's about 35%, which means total cases are doubling every 2.3 days. Given the lack of testing in many places and NYC's influence on the numbers, I'm sure NYC is driving the aggregate data. It would be interesting to extract the NYC data from the US total and compare.

It's doubling every 2.5 days.

Yes, he's a so-called expert...

It's the wine...

In case anyone was interested in some economics, the Fed is throwing trillions of dollars into the financial system, stated it will buy as many T-bonds as necessary, intervening in new markets, propping up corporate debt markets, and probably keeping all the Wall Street banks solvent. The Fed has unlimited ammunition. On the fiscal side, we are talking a $2 trillion package. Where will they get all of that money as the economy is collapsing? A crisis exposes a lot of falsehoods about economics...

I'm sure that's what doctors in NYC hospitals are saying right now...

Yes, I’m sure they won’t funnel any into trump’s business either. And I agree, no one needs to know. Why should they know where public money goes? Stupid Dems.

Those numbers aren’t fixed. Give it another week.

It’s taking the place of his rallies.

Cases are down another 14% from previous day. 3/21 6557 3/22 5560 3/23 4789 This is why you take extreme measures of quarantining, to bring the rate of contagion down. This is good news @PaoloBillsFanFromItaly

Interesting piece on the virus and differences in "types" of Trump supporters. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/03/why-some-early-maga-adopters-went-against-trumps-virus-doctrine

Washington State follow up? Nope, not a peep. In the first article he used examples to show how to estimate the number of true cases since testing was so limited. He used Washington, SF, and a few countries. Unfortunately, it still took Washington State a long time to get testing ramped up--it's only been the last week. Since he is focused on predicting situations for countries, I'm not sure what your issue is here? Diamond Princess? Clearly a statistical anomaly. But Italy isn't. He used DP also as an example for estimating the CFR, which he said would be between 1-6%. Again, not sure what the issue is here? My view is DP is a good example of how to keep it contained by extreme quarantining of people, as everyone was confined to their cabins, which limited the cases. He lumped the Swiss as one of the countries who were late in responding, without noting that the country has negligible deaths from CV. Based on the article, he was predicting what would happen to countries based on their responses. He predicted the growth in the # of cases for the swiss would accelerate because of their late response. As of the date of his prediction, 3/5, Swiss had 120 cases and 1 death; currently they have 8500 cases and 118 deaths. I don't know what your definition of negligible is...? Which brings me to the biggest problem of painting this virus with as broad brush as possible. As we're about to finish the third month in a pandemic, clear patterns are emerging despite what people like Puevo want you to believe, and that pattern is much closer to Leavitt's & Ginn's theories. Culture, demographics and climate all play a major role in the spread, and that's why you are seeing an explosion in Lombardy & NYC (Australia is not a problem btw). Other areas of the Italy are faring much better, and don't get me started on NYS north of Orange County compared to the NY metro area. Even the NY's first major outbreak in New Rochelle appears to be abating, similarly to what happened in Washington. But that's not NYC because people are on top of one another, and they're stupid. I witnessed what Cuomo was talking about first hand yesterday. All along the West Side, it was as if there's no danger lurking. He states that demographics and climate to play a roll. Very few people are getting airtime to propose commonsense solutions. Hype sells. We keep getting bombarded by stories of Chinese, South Korean and Singapore lockdowns, without getting much details of what happened. Reality is none of these countries truly locked down. And here's where experience with SARS and their culture came in to curb the spread. EVERYONE obeyed common social norms, they wore masks, they kept their distance and they washed their hands. Lo and behold, the spread slowed down and spread. Not so hard. Avoid direct contact and keep washing yourself. Regarding how SKorea did it, he linked to this video in the second article which explains it. https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-51897979/coronavirus-south-korea-seeing-a-stabilising-trend Regarding Singapore, he linked to this article: https://academic.oup.com/jtm/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jtm/taaa039/5804843 Neither SK or Singapore needed to use lockdowns, so I"m not sure where that statement comes from? Regarding China, did you not see videos of their lockdown? It seems you are putting your own spin on his basic analysis. Here's what he is saying in my view. 1. Countries that acted quickly to limit the spread (as described in the above two pieces) experienced low CFRs and for the most part number of cases. SKorea had the issue of on super-predator underlying a significant number of cases. That CFR is was between 0.5 - 1.0%. 2. Countries that reacted late will experience exponential growth and higher CFR, between 3-5%. This is due to the healthcare system being overwhelmed, not the actual death rate from the virus itself, as in #1. 3. Countries in the latter group, if they act fast and use extreme measures (what he calls the hammer) can reduce the death rate. It's all about getting R0 near or below 1. 4. In article 2, he puts together a hypothetical chart 15 which looks at different measures that reduce R0. The first two points listed are climate and pop density. He also tries to provide estimates of economic impact from the various strategies, and he says policy makers need to weigh the cost-benefits of implementing. Maybe we read different articles? 5. His conclusion, based on the Chinese evidence of extreme quarantine, is that it would take about 2 weeks of the extreme measures to get us close to 1. However, this strategy also means that many people will most likely get it in the next season, but he says that buys us time to prepare and we won't have to take extreme measures. I've seen criticisms that his estimate of 2 weeks is too short. So, from what I see, he admits that climate, pop density, and demographics all impact the spread and therefore the CFR, so he covers your criticisms. It seems to me, all the countries that delayed their responses are experiencing exponential growth as predicted, including Switzerland. My guess is that it will take 3-4 weeks for us to reduce the spread because so many people are #######s who don't heed the quarantine, your "culture" variable I guess... If the bill being discussed was set up to keep people employed by government support, then the economy could recover more quickly. Unfortunately, most of it seems to be a corporate boost controlled by the Munchkin, much like what Paulson's original bailout proposal was.

Cases in Italy declined 15% compared to yesterday. Hopefully they’re turning the corner.

Quarantine life...

Never waste a good crisis...

So Fox news is not part of the media?

All deficit spending is essentially helicopter money. At least he doesn't get into petty squabbles with reporters... of course, you guys would've criticized him for wasting money on ventilators back then anyway.

Should've added, the issue is we just don't know yet. Regarding his second article, he suggests extreme measures would take 2-3 weeks to get the R0 factor down. However, with fewer people infected, we could expect another burst late fall. That would give us the time to prepare though.

Pueyo links to an article on temps and virus, which suggests there "may" be an impact. Looking at the data for Australia and Brazil, however, both are on exponential growth paths currently.

There was no preventing the virus, yes. However, your response, or lack, will determine if you end up like Italy or China/Korea. We had an opportunity to be on the right side after shutting down flights to China, but it was wasted.

Not really. Yes.

The lack of testing early on, what I was harping on weeks ago, is why we got to the point of taking extreme measures now. But, yes, it’s all about saving lives now.

I'd be wary of that if you don't know the veracity of the site. I'm sure people are taking advantage of the situation. I'm more interested in your opinion of the second article when you have the time.