HotardAg07 said:

---

We are, at best at the peak in deaths considering the there highest days of reported deaths were literally the last 3 days, with 35,000 cumulative deaths to date. As Nate Silver and others have pointed out, it's faulty to assume that the death curve will be symmetrical and end in zero. It's more realistic that there will be a long tail on the backside of this curve. There are still tens of thousands of patients in critical care who have yet to come out the other side o this.

As a math major I don't know how you so definitively make that statement about being under 60k.

Below is a good thread on the topic of the model shapes:

---

Sorry for the bump, but we just crossed 60,000 deaths today so it made me think of this post.

IHME predicting between 57,000-122,000 as the range with 72,000 as the result.

Carl Bergmann was promoting this model yesterday as a good one. It takes into account loosening of social distancing and actually grows uncertainty as time goes on where IHME was bringing their uncertainty range for cases and deathsbasically to zero in july/august which doesn't really make sense. That model has 88,000 as the low end and 293,000 as the high end with 150,000 as the predicted total.
https://covid19-projections.com/

It makes sense there are 3 places we could go from here:
1. Cases and deaths decay to near zero levels, similar to South Korea, due to sustained R0 <1.
2. Cases and deaths decay to some sustainable level where R0 ~1. Not bad enough to overwhelm hospitals and trigger a public response, but something lingering for a while.
3. As social distancing is relaxed, R0 resumes a >1 trajectory and reverses course.

2 seems like the most likely scenario.The model shows things flattening out in the 600-700 deaths per day level which is how they get to 150,000 cases by August 1. If that number was 200-300 then the number would obviously be lower.

Back to the IHME model, again it's worth emphasizing that the IHME model's main purpose was to predict peak healthcare need and it appears to have predicted the peak fairly accurately. IHME is part of a hospital system and that was their purpose. Predicting the exact shape of the back end of the curve isn't really part of their main mission.

As I've shared before, here's how the IHME model for the US has held up since Mar 23 WH press conference (very well IMO):

1 cant happen without testing and monitoring and that cant happen without public support and that cant happen without a body count.

2. This will be the long term outcome but is dependent on 95-99% of people's social behaviors changing which wont happen without a body count.

3 is what we are in for over the short term. In a lot of social circles rejecting of social distancing and mitigation activities is seen as a sign of virility.


Tldr. We will get down to a low R0 but it will come after a second wave.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

MasterAggie said:

---

Those tweets make no sense. His dr said take his medicine or the virus could kill him. He did. He's alive. He thinks the dr is an idiot? WTF?

---

This pandemic has thrown a lot of new curveballs at everybody involved, so I move back and forth being patient and impatient with the folks trying to figure this thing out.

---

Those tweets were a sarcastic response to the people that didnt think the lockdowns were needed because they worked.


Like all of the people that say Y2K was joke since nothing happened.

Nothing happened at midnight on Y2K because so much happened before midnight Y2K.

Not really. Still a lot of people making absolute and definitive statements about something no one understands.

Looks like the early estimates of 200k deaths in the US might be a little low.

Other than the 2.2 million one that everyone likes to bag on, most of the widely reported numbers from spring aren't that far off.

amercer said:

---

Looks like the early estimates of 200k deaths in the US might be a little low.

Other than the 2.2 million one that everyone likes to bag on, most of the widely reported numbers from spring aren't that far off.

---

If you believe the numbers...

This was used as justification for shutting down in CA. We never exceeded 9000 beds. We are at 6000 now. We are still locked down.

Newoldarmy said:

---

Not really. Still a lot of people making absolute and definitive statements about something no one understands.

---

I don't know why people keep saying this. We know plenty about it. We know that is a mild illness for the vast majority of people, but the sick and elderly are at a higher risk for severe cases. We know how it spreads. Doctors have become much better at treating the severe cases. Pharmaceutical companies have developed multiple potential vaccines that seem to work.

Anybody still saying we don't understand covid, like it's some kind of mysterious disease unlike anything before it is just playing into the fear mongering. Covid is nothing special.

SirLurksALot said:

---

Newoldarmy said:

---

Not really. Still a lot of people making absolute and definitive statements about something no one understands.

---

I don't know why people keep saying this. We know plenty about it. We know that is a mild illness for the vast majority of people, but the sick and elderly are at a higher risk for severe cases. We know how it spreads. Doctors have become much better at treating the severe cases. Pharmaceutical companies have developed multiple potential vaccines that seem to work.

Anybody still saying we don't understand covid, like it's some kind of mysterious disease unlike anything before it is just playing into the fear mongering. Covid is nothing special.

---

Keegan99 said:

---

We're more than halfway through this one. It will be under 60k. Depending on how numbers get fudged.

The IHME model was at 61k previously and will be adjusted downward today.

We would need at least two more cycles as intense as this one to sniff 200k.

---

As usual, Keegan's comments aged well.

IHME model ended up being garbage.

That's on me for giving those "experts" credibility.

Keegan99 said:

---

IHME model ended up being garbage.

That's on me for giving those "experts" credibility.

---

That overstated confidence is the problem with your posts. Time to admit we don't know nearly enough about this virus to make definitive statements...

200k deaths? The models say never!
Another spike predicted in Europe? They're at herd immunity, never!
Case acceleration in the US? It's all from better testing, deaths will only go down!

He's been right more often than wrong, at least recently. We all had some misses back in March/April.

I always figured 200k was going to happen. In fact, I believe I thought 500-600k or even upwards of 800k at one point. So not sure why he was saying less than 200k. With 329 million people, adding up to 200k doesn't take much.

Also, that spike in Europe. Where? Overall, or just in selective areas, right? Doesn't really do much to prove herd immunity isn't achieved at a lower level. Meaning, if it's in another area that hasn't been hit hard. Still not really seeing much of a spike on some graphs.

Aren't deaths in the US beginning a trend down, overall? OR at least, seem to have hit a peak on the current graphs? Seems like California/Texas/Florida had a spike at once(90 million of the population), and now with those big states coming down that bodes well overall. https://covid19-projections.com/us

Consider the R rate is less than 1 and case rates are tapering off, I'd say that bodes well for deaths trending down soon.

Models didn't take fraud into account. I imagine many of the COVID deaths are BS. (Maybe 10% or more)

The only thing special about Covid was a massive misinformation campaign China ran early on squelching info first then providing misinformation which set the world back months before they could start learning how to treat it correctly.