Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
At this point the model appears to be spot on. It projects 10,571 deaths by April 6th and the actual number (as of this post) is 10,327. It's spooky how sharply the number of deaths is projected to climb from the beginning of April to the beginning of May.
What is really concerning is that the model predicts a shortage of 36,654 beds when the numbers reach their peak. Almost 37,000 Americans who require hospitalization won't get it and this will add to the toll thousands of deaths that should never have happened.
Just FYI, the model for the present day is always going to project virtually identical to the actual number because the model is updated with real time data daily so it is consistent with reality.
Are the ones that tested positive in the hospital? Did they even know they had it?
No to being hospitalized. As far as "knowing they had it", only those with symptoms can be tested, so I suppose so. In the county south (where I work) about 40 have tested positive (not sure how many tested) with 2 hospitalized. Others were sent home.
No to being hospitalized. As far as "knowing they had it", only those with symptoms can be tested, so I suppose so. In the county south (where I work) about 40 have tested positive (not sure how many tested) with 2 hospitalized. Others were sent home.
Rgr. Thanks for the info. I guess they need to do a random sampling in an urban area to get some decent stats.
Uhmmm... the model that this thread is about. You can find the link in the OP.
Did you just regain consciousness after an overdose of covfefe?
LOL. If there's anyone having an overdose of COV-anything, it's the left and their constant hyperbole, hysteria, and sensationalism. But it's my bad on the model. You guys are right, the admin is using that one and it greatly over-predicted impacts of the pandemic. A good model is a reasonable predictor of the future. It's no great achievement to restate the present as modeled data.
Just FYI, the model for the present day is always going to project virtually identical to the actual number because the model is updated with real time data daily so it is consistent with reality.
Yep, but the graph I was referring to hasn't been updated yet, so it still shows the numbers as "projected."
Btw, I must admit that I am surprised that I have not yet seen very many protests about all the precautions and expense that were taken to combat what was not much worse than a bad "flu" season.
(And, yes, I do know that COVID-19 is not the flu, and I am not one of those "Monday morning quarterbacks" -- or at least not yet, anyway. The point is that as this was a NEW virus, no one could have said definitely how bad it was going to be.
However, in hindsight, I would be willing to bet that many, many people will be 'screaming bloody murder' about what they perceive, perhaps with some justification, as being a huge overreaction. But, just remember, it is not over with YET, and things can change, although I personally intend to resume my normal life as much as possible starting about May 1st.)
All of this shows the challenge of computer modeling-the results are only as good as the assumptions put into the mathematical calculations. And often a small change in assumptions can drive a huge change in results, especially as you get further from the present time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.