[RationalExpectations]

Originally Posted by OmegaSupreme

No chance it's going to be 2 million. It's estimated that 25% or more are asymptomatic so the real death rate from my calculations is 0.5% or lower. IF everyone in the US got infected, then... do the math.

Worst case scenario, I would say 1.3 million dead.

I hope you're right.

One of the issues is models are built on assumptions which in turn are built on assumptions which in turn are built on assumptions, etc. Very much like a house built on a foundation of sand.

Both the numerator and denominator in percentage calculations are highly suspect. But if we take today's WHO numbers (also highly suspect because they include China),

Confirmed deaths WW from COVID-19: 74,870
Confirmed COVID-19 infections WW: 1,359,398

Confirmed deaths as a percentage of total confirmed infections: ~ 5.5%.

In the USA,

Confirmed deaths from COVID-19: 11,773
Confirmed COVID-19 infections: 377,317

Confirmed deaths as a percentage of total confirmed infections: ~ 3.1%.

And yes, both the numerator and denominator are understated and both are suspect, but that's the data we have.

With roughly 330 million people in the USA, a 3.1% death rate implies about 10,296,620 dead.

Your upper bound of about 1.3 million implies a death rate of about 0.4%.

One difficulty in forecasting these things is we have exogenous impacts coming in all the time: variance in adherence to social distancing, the potential for new antibody testing, the potential for increased coronavirus testing, etc etc.

[equid0x]

Originally Posted by RationalExpectations

I hope you're right.

One of the issues is models are built on assumptions which in turn are built on assumptions which in turn are built on assumptions, etc. Very much like a house built on a foundation of sand.

Both the numerator and denominator in percentage calculations are highly suspect. But if we take today's WHO numbers (also highly suspect because they include China),

Confirmed deaths WW from COVID-19: 74,870
Confirmed COVID-19 infections WW: 1,359,398

Confirmed deaths as a percentage of total confirmed infections: ~ 5.5%.

In the USA,

Confirmed deaths from COVID-19: 11,773
Confirmed COVID-19 infections: 377,317

Confirmed deaths as a percentage of total confirmed infections: ~ 3.1%.

And yes, both the numerator and denominator are understated and both are suspect, but that's the data we have.

With roughly 330 million people in the USA, a 3.1% death rate implies about 10,296,620 dead.

Your upper bound of about 1.3 million implies a death rate of about 0.4%.

One difficulty in forecasting these things is we have exogenous impacts coming in all the time: variance in adherence to social distancing, the potential for new antibody testing, the potential for increased coronavirus testing, etc etc.

So far, the IHME model they've been using for the predictions has been wrong in every single state except Wisconsin. They've been off by an order of magnitude ... 5x - 10x less than predicted.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if we find out later that someone mucked with the model data in order to manufacture a crisis the same way they did with the climate data models when Congress was talking about carbon credits and global warming.

[equid0x]

Originally Posted by RationalExpectations

I hope you're right.

One of the issues is models are built on assumptions which in turn are built on assumptions which in turn are built on assumptions, etc. Very much like a house built on a foundation of sand.

Both the numerator and denominator in percentage calculations are highly suspect. But if we take today's WHO numbers (also highly suspect because they include China),

Confirmed deaths WW from COVID-19: 74,870
Confirmed COVID-19 infections WW: 1,359,398

Confirmed deaths as a percentage of total confirmed infections: ~ 5.5%.

In the USA,

Confirmed deaths from COVID-19: 11,773
Confirmed COVID-19 infections: 377,317

Confirmed deaths as a percentage of total confirmed infections: ~ 3.1%.

And yes, both the numerator and denominator are understated and both are suspect, but that's the data we have.

With roughly 330 million people in the USA, a 3.1% death rate implies about 10,296,620 dead.

Your upper bound of about 1.3 million implies a death rate of about 0.4%.

One difficulty in forecasting these things is we have exogenous impacts coming in all the time: variance in adherence to social distancing, the potential for new antibody testing, the potential for increased coronavirus testing, etc etc.

Also, a 3.1% mortality rate among confirmed cases does not translate to a 3.1% mortality rate among all people.

11773/330M translates to a 0.004% overall mortality rate.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by equid0x

So far, the IHME model they've been using for the predictions has been wrong in every single state except Wisconsin. They've been off by an order of magnitude ... 5x - 10x less than predicted.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if we find out later that someone mucked with the model data in order to manufacture a crisis the same way they did with the climate data models when Congress was talking about carbon credits and global warming.

You appear to have the problem backwards. The complaints about the IHME model are that it is too optimistic - That the administration is using it to limit resources to the states...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...-model-agrees/

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by equid0x

Also, a 3.1% mortality rate among confirmed cases does not translate to a 3.1% mortality rate among all people.

11773/330M translates to a 0.004% overall mortality rate.

Are you actually claiming we all have it?

The Death Rate generally used is the percent who die of those infected.

You could do a statistic against the total population but you would need to project how many people get infected to get a rational answer.

[CD2017]

Originally Posted by equid0x

Also, a 3.1% mortality rate among confirmed cases does not translate to a 3.1% mortality rate among all people.

11773/330M translates to a 0.004% overall mortality rate.

That's some interesting math. That's not how a mortality rate is calculated. Granted, we have no real idea because we have no tests. It's pretty tough to get an idea of what's happening with the virus right now. We likely won't have a good idea for months due to the incomplete data. We might never know.

When it's all said and done, I'm thinking the mortality rate FOR THOSE INFECTED will be about ~1.5 percent in the US.

[equid0x]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

You appear to have the problem backwards. The complaints about the IHME model are that it is too optimistic - That the administration is using it to limit resources to the states...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...-model-agrees/

The IHME models predicted substantially higher hospitalizations and mortalities than where we are right now.

Cuomo even backed off his request for more ventilators saying the current projections show they won't be needed right now.

That's a lot of backpedaling for a state that predicted pure unbridled certain doom a week ago. Hell, now they're saying it looks like they hit their peak days ago.

[equid0x]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

Are you actually claiming we all have it?

The Death Rate generally used is the percent who die of those infected.

You could do a statistic against the total population but you would need to project how many people get infected to get a rational answer.

No. In the prior post someone calculated out the mortality rate then multiplied that by US population and said millions would die. That's not how those statistics work.

[equid0x]

Originally Posted by rhuff80

That's some interesting math. That's not how a mortality rate is calculated. Granted, we have no real idea because we have no tests. It's pretty tough to get an idea of what's happening with the virus right now. We likely won't have a good idea for months due to the incomplete data. We might never know.

When it's all said and done, I'm thinking the mortality rate FOR THOSE INFECTED will be about ~1.5 percent in the US.

Let's clear this up right now. You cannot take the mortality rate among tested cases and translate that to mortalities in the general population.

3.1% of tested cases dying != 3.1% of all people dying. It's far more likely the ultimate death toll will be something like .2% of total population.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by equid0x

The IHME models predicted substantially higher hospitalizations and mortalities than where we are right now.

Cuomo even backed off his request for more ventilators saying the current projections show they won't be needed right now.

That's a lot of backpedaling for a state that predicted pure unbridled certain doom a week ago. Hell, now they're saying it looks like they hit their peak days ago.

Read the cited article. It is clear that the IHME model is optimistic...

******************************************
Experts and state leaders, however, continued to steel themselves for grim weeks ahead, noting that the revised model created by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington conflicts with many other models showing higher equipment shortages, deaths and projected peaks.
******************************************

And an example...
******************************************
This is how starkly models can differ.

Local leaders in the District said on Friday that their model estimates the outbreak in the nation’s capital will peak June 28. The IHME model predicts the peak is coming in just days, on April 16. The District’s model predicts hospitals will need 1,453 ventilators at the peak. IHME predicts a need for only 107. The District is using the IHME model as a best-case scenario and the more dire model to prepare for a likely surge.
******************************************
So somehow you believe the IHME model is pessimistic?