Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
TuFun

Do we Cancel Everything? You still Travelling??

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, MartinRex007 said:

The  report shown above is five "COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios that are designed to help inform decisions by modelers and public health officials who utilize mathematical modeling. The five planning scenarios are being used by mathematical modelers throughout the Federal government.  Models developed using the data provided in the planning scenarios can help evaluate the potential effects of different community mitigation strategies (e.g., social distancing)."

"The scenarios are intended to advance public health preparedness and planning They are not predictions or estimates of the expected impact of COVID-19." 

Really only useful for modeling and planning, I wouldn't read to much into them?

Martin

 

OK, yes, this is data used to develop the models.  The report is not a prediction or estimate of the expected impact of Covid-19.  Got it.

But wasn't the guidance from all the public health agencies based on ***models***?  Wasn't the planning, preparation, and the estimated number of infections, hospitalizations, and deaths, based on ***models***? 

Why, yes, all those things were in large part based on models.  Dr Fauci and Birx said as much over and over again on television almost every day. 

So now that newer data has come in and the CDC has revised its figures based on that new data so that the models can be more accurate, all you can say is "really only useful for modeling and planning, I wouldn't read to much into them"?

Uh, OK.

Anyway, the report is there for all to read.  Covid-19 is not nearly as deadly as we were all led to believe by the media and others.

Dave

 

Edited by dave2013

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

Covid-19 is not nearly as deadly as we were all led to believe by the media and others.

From the CDC report "New data on COVID-19 is available daily; information about its biological and epidemiological characteristics remain limited, and uncertainty remains around nearly all parameter values.". I'll say it again, don't read to much into it!

It's a lot more deadly, concludes a new study by the University of Washington published May 7 in the journal Health Affairs. The study's results also project a grim future if the U.S. doesn't put up a strong fight against the spread of the virus.

The national rate of death among people infected with the novel coronavirus -- SARS-CoV-2 -- that causes COVID-19 and who show symptoms is 1.3%, the study found. The comparable rate of death for the seasonal flu is 0.1%.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/05/200518144915.htm

Martin

Edited by MartinRex007

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

Covid-19 is not nearly as deadly as we were all led to believe by the media and others

That's a pretty myopic thing to say just after the death toll in your country hit 100,000, even with wide scale lockdowns.

  • Like 7

i7 6700K, GTX1080, 32GB DDR4 RAM, X34 3440x1440, Ruddy girt big mug of Yorkshire Tea

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, n4gix said:

Well, drive-through testing has finally come to NW Indiana. I'm planning to get tested tomorrow morning since I'm over 65, obese, and am diabetic...

Are they doing drive-thru antibody testing for history of previous infection, or rt-PCR testing for an active infection?


Bob Scott | AVSIM Forums Administrator | AVSIM Board of Directors

ATP Gulfstream II-III-IV-V

System: i9-10900K @ 5.2GHz on custom water loop, ASUS Maximus XII Hero, 32GB GSkill 3600MHz CAS15, eVGA 2080Ti XC Ultra, Samsung 55" JS8500 4K TV@30Hz, 5xSamsung SSD, eVGA 1KW PSU, 1Gbps internet

SB XFi Titanium, optical link to Yamaha RX-V467, Polk/Klipsch 6" bookshelf spkrs, Polk 12" subwoofer, 12.9" iPad Pro, PFC yoke/throttle quad/pedals with custom Hall sensors, Coolermaster HAF932 case, Stream Deck XL button box

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, dave2013 said:

These numbers are for symptomatic cases only, which makes sense as I'm guessing that if you don't have symptoms then you probably won't die from it.

The asymptomatic stage is an early stage of infection, when the virus is in the upper respiratory system and has not yet begun to produce symptoms.  People with asymptomatic infection often proceed to develop symptoms, and some of them die.  While asymptomatic, they are highly contagious.

"Asymptomatic" does not equal "mild" or "not serious" or "not ultimately fatal."

Edited by Alan_A


Alan Ampolsk

"Ah, Paula, they are firing at me!"
-- Saint-Exupery

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Alan_A said:

The asymptomatic stage is an early stage of infection, when the virus is in the upper respiratory system and has not yet begun to produce symptoms.  People with asymptomatic infection often proceed to develop symptoms, and some of them die.  While asymptomatic, they are highly contagious.

"Asymptomatic" does not equal "mild" or "not serious" or "not ultimately fatal."

I think it's important to distinguish between use of the term as a current state, versus as a classification of disease severity.  Both are used.  As a state, you can have the disease but not show any symptoms, but if symptoms do later develop that state is retroactively reclassified as "presymptomatic" rather than "asymptomatic".  If, however, you run the complete course of the disease without detecting symptoms, that case is classified, as a measure of severity, as an "asymptomatic case", meaning that the person was infected and resolved the infection naturally without any symptoms ever being detected. 

I read an article in the New England Journal of Medicine today that more clearly makes that distinction:  https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2009758

The stats Dave referenced w/r/t asymptomatic cases are almost certainly the latter, e.g. people who run the entire course of the disease without ever becoming aware they had it.

 

  • Like 2

Bob Scott | AVSIM Forums Administrator | AVSIM Board of Directors

ATP Gulfstream II-III-IV-V

System: i9-10900K @ 5.2GHz on custom water loop, ASUS Maximus XII Hero, 32GB GSkill 3600MHz CAS15, eVGA 2080Ti XC Ultra, Samsung 55" JS8500 4K TV@30Hz, 5xSamsung SSD, eVGA 1KW PSU, 1Gbps internet

SB XFi Titanium, optical link to Yamaha RX-V467, Polk/Klipsch 6" bookshelf spkrs, Polk 12" subwoofer, 12.9" iPad Pro, PFC yoke/throttle quad/pedals with custom Hall sensors, Coolermaster HAF932 case, Stream Deck XL button box

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, scotchegg said:

That's a pretty myopic thing to say just after the death toll in your country hit 100,000, even with wide scale lockdowns.

Sure, whatever you say. 

100,000 people is 0.03% of the population, and the vast majority of that 0.03% are either people over 65 years old and/or with pre-existing health problems.  Almost that many die during an especially severe flu season.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, dave2013 said:

But wasn't the guidance from all the public health agencies based on ***models***?  Wasn't the planning, preparation, and the estimated number of infections, hospitalizations, and deaths, based on ***models***? 

Models are just forecasting tools - in some sense, they're simulations, and they simulate different things.

The model that was used in the White House briefings - the IHME model - used data and trends about covid deaths to forecast hospital capacity (it's since been revised to take more information into account).  It was designed for and used by hospital administrators.

These models have a different purpose - they're designed to look at different mitigation strategies (like lockdowns and more limited social distancing) and project how the number of cases might grow. The variables are the number of infected people, the number of encounters they have, and the transmission rate.  They don't tell you what's going to happen - they tell you what might happen in different scenarios depending on what actions you do or don't take to regulate behavior.

Early on in the pandemic, there was a lot of attention paid to the UK's Imperial College model, which similarly looked at a range of policy options from total lockdown to no restrictions at all.  At the high end of the forecast, it projected 2 million deaths in the US.  That wasn't a prediction of what was going to happen - it was a simulation of what would happen in the most extreme scenario, where there were no steps taken to reduce transmission.  Not what will happen, but what could happen.

Each model is different, and to work with it you need to know what question it's trying to answer.

  • Like 1


Alan Ampolsk

"Ah, Paula, they are firing at me!"
-- Saint-Exupery

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I think it's important to distinguish between use of the term as a current state, versus as a classification of disease severity.  Both are used.  As a state, you can have the disease but not show any symptoms, but if symptoms do later develop that state is retroactively reclassified as "presymptomatic" rather than "asymptomatic".  If, however, you run the complete course of the disease without detecting symptoms, that case is classified, as a measure of severity, as an "asymptomatic case", meaning that the person was infected and resolved the infection naturally without any symptoms ever being detected. 

Agreed.  The distinction may matter more from a clinical standpoint (especially if it tells you something about viral load, or allows you to project the course of the person's infection) than from a public health standpoint, where an asymptomatic and a presymptomatic patient represent pretty much the same thing - a person with no symptoms who might be contagious, but who isn't going to be detected by temperature checks or other kinds of symptom-focused screening.

It could be that at some future point, we find out that the presymptomatic patients are more contagious, and then you'd want a quick, reliable way to measure viral load.  But right now, it makes more sense to cast a wide net.

If it does turn out that higher viral load predicts symptomatic illness, then that would factor into projections and make them more accurate.



Alan Ampolsk

"Ah, Paula, they are firing at me!"
-- Saint-Exupery

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Alan_A said:

A new publication in Science,  the journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/05/27/science.abc6197

Short version: wear a mask.

All polls I have seen show the majority of Americans understand this and agree with the necessity. The ones protesting appear to be statistical outliers.

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Just Flight Beta Tester
 
We are all connected..... To each other, biologically...... To the Earth, chemically...... To the rest of the Universe atomically.
 
Devons rig
Intel Core i7 8700K @ 5.0GHz / 32.0GB G.SKILL TridentZ Series Dual-Channel Ram / ZOTAC GAMING GeForce® RTX 2080 Ti Triple Fan / Sound Blaster Z / Oculus Rift VR Headset / Klipsch® Promedia 2.1 Computer Speakers / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG279Q ‑ 27" IPS LED Monitor ‑ QHD / 2x Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500GB / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 5 Motherboard

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, dave2013 said:

Sure, whatever you say. 

100,000 people is 0.03% of the population, and the vast majority of that 0.03% are either people over 65 years old and/or with pre-existing health problems.  Almost that many die during an especially severe flu season.

Dave

 

Covid deaths will be in addition to this seasons flu deaths though. We cant draw any real conclusions untill we look at all cause mortality in 12 months time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, dave2013 said:

Covid-19 is not nearly as deadly as we were all led to believe by the media and others

Absolutely correct ........ it can only kill you once, what's all the fuss about?

100,000+ of your countrymen dead probably isn't too bad if you don't know/aren't related to any of them.

Dave.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, dave belsey said:

Absolutely correct ........ it can only kill you once, what's all the fuss about?

 

Yep - or the equivalent of about 190 fully laden 747s (or roughly 460 737s) that have crashed over the past three months. But nothing to see here. Keep up the good work!

 

😐

 

Mallard

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, dave belsey said:

Absolutely correct ........ it can only kill you once, what's all the fuss about?

100,000+ of your countrymen dead probably isn't too bad if you don't know/aren't related to any of them.

Dave.

 

 

LOL! That reminded me I had downloaded this a while ago........

gRnj2q.jpg

  • Like 3

Just Flight Beta Tester
 
We are all connected..... To each other, biologically...... To the Earth, chemically...... To the rest of the Universe atomically.
 
Devons rig
Intel Core i7 8700K @ 5.0GHz / 32.0GB G.SKILL TridentZ Series Dual-Channel Ram / ZOTAC GAMING GeForce® RTX 2080 Ti Triple Fan / Sound Blaster Z / Oculus Rift VR Headset / Klipsch® Promedia 2.1 Computer Speakers / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG279Q ‑ 27" IPS LED Monitor ‑ QHD / 2x Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500GB / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 5 Motherboard

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    28%
    $7,170.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...