For Posterity

[VaticanAssassin]

Since this is what I do for a living (well, use to before becoming upper management)
Here are the current results of my model:

I have a current prevalence of 5.4%. So 17.8m cases, 38k deaths, .21% mortality
By the end of year prevalence will be 6.97%. So 23million cases, mortality stays constant for 49k deaths. W/O social distance the numbers would have been 37mill and 78k deaths at a prevalence of 11.34%

This compares to the flu at 35mill and 34k deaths.

So now you all can come back in 2021 and laugh at how wrong my numbers turn out because you don’t understand how models work...

 

[oggbashan]

I hope you are right but if social distancing is ignored? Your model doesn't work because the variables are unpredictable.

 

[KeithD]

When are lunkheads going to absorb that the coronavirus isn't instead of any other disease; it's on top of the others? And it's extremely communicable.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

I hope you are right but if social distancing is ignored? Your model doesn't work because the variables are unpredictable.

Lots of qualitative assumptions on the W/O social distance numbers. But at the end of the day social distance doesn’t drive mortality much, mostly prevalence. There are enough countries not doing social distance, and you compare data between states/countries and when they got their first case vs. days till shutdown.


So like any model you see right now there is a lot more art than science.

 

[sygn]

Since this is what I do for a living (well, use to before becoming upper management)..

ishtat sort or humble brag?

 

[bellisarius]

Does your model take into consideration the latest study out of Stanford? They did a study based on Igg testing and found that the prevalence rate was astronomically higher than anyone had supposed.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Does your model take into consideration the latest study out of Stanford? They did a study based on Igg testing and found that the prevalence rate was astronomically higher than anyone had supposed.

It did. But mine is actually higher. Theirs is 3-4%

 

[Conager]

When are lunkheads going to absorb that the coronavirus isn't instead of any other disease; it's on top of the others? And it's extremely communicable.

From an actuarial perspective, you can only succumb to one fatal disease at a time.

It doesn't actually matter which respiratory disease you get if your poor health does not give you the breathing room <heh> to fight off a respiratory infection.

 

[Rightguide]

How do you know you're even working with credible data to begin with?

 

[ishtat]

How do you know you're even working with credible data to begin with?

Not often I agree with you RG but the data is worse than not credible; it is all totally incomplete. For example:

Taiwan, South Korea, New Zealand, Germany, UAE and Australia probably have a decent grip on numbers of infections. Anyone else, probably not. Even deaths are not reliable, Iran and China are propaganda, almost all others need revision for under reporting, over reporting, wrong reporting and incorrect diagnosis. Example: the UK, normally considered a reliable reporter has admitted that they probably need to add at least 3000 deaths to their numbers from old peoples homes

Trends can be observed but the reasoning behind them can be hit or miss. Forecasts are a mugs game : how many since say February have been correct - none if you acknowledge the fluke effect.

Keith D made a valid point that Corvid 19 was 'producing numbers on top of other diseases. Every year the Japanese for example produce a report detailing deaths/distribution and severity of their flu season. It is very detailed and has been going for ages.. Next year their numbers for 2020 are not going to repeat the historical norms of previous flu seasons. Only detailed comparative analysis will eventually give a decent handle on Japan's covid19 experience. Their numbers are probably much worse than reported so far but how much worse no-one knows.

 

[bellisarius]

It's a moving target to be sure.

Vat is taking a shot based on the numbers known today along with his own prognostication.

What one of the major problems is is that the death rate is being based on known infections vs deaths and that is a bogus number. The correct death rate would be based on deaths vs TOTAL infections and that's a number no one has.

There is a recent study that suggests that the total infections is far higher than anyone realized in that the disease seems to have very little effect in the way of symptoms with a great many people. The link to that study is contained in the below linked post.

Link to recent study

 

[SpeareChucker]

Since this is what I do for a living (well, use to before becoming upper management)
Here are the current results of my model:

I have a current prevalence of 5.4%. So 17.8m cases, 38k deaths, .21% mortality
By the end of year prevalence will be 6.97%. So 23million cases, mortality stays constant for 49k deaths. W/O social distance the numbers would have been 37mill and 78k deaths at a prevalence of 11.34%

This compares to the flu at 35mill and 34k deaths.

So now you all can come back in 2021 and laugh at how wrong my numbers turn out because you don’t understand how models work...

 

[Lancecastor19]

I have a friend who is normally in very robust health who was home with pneumonia for nearly 3 weeks in January. I saw him in late February, we shook hands, as people did back then.

I had a persistent cough for a week or two in early march.

I think we will reach herd immunity faster than forecast and eventually learn it was far more widespread than the numbers are saying.

 

[SpeareChucker]

I hope you are right but if social distancing is ignored? Your model doesn't work because the variables are unpredictable.

I tried to point this out from the beginning.
A model of a chaotic system in which the
population of the system knows that it is
being observed changes its behavior.

The evidence that the destruction of our economy
was warranted by some imagined lowered mortality rate
is quite possibly the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

And as also pointed out, the alarmists have the best of both worlds
while the optimist has the worst of everything.
The pessimist can always tell the optimist, you were too rosy
based up cherry-picking outcomes/locations/populations while
taking credit for being right if the worst materializes and if
disaster does not occur, take credit for their warning
being the mitigating factor.

But what has really occurred, as shown by dolf's poll,
is that government, through this dry run, now has a template
and guidance on how to seize control under the pretext of "emergency"
after observing, first hand, how willing so many of their subjects were willing
to run to them for security and so easily and willingly surrounding their liberties
while at once labeling any- and everyone still concerned about liberty as the real danger
to their personal security in the hollow and shallow guise of saving someone else's life...



... a complete, total and irresponsible straw-man argument which bodes well for no one but the tyrant -
and how many times, day-after-day-after week after month do we hear the lamentation and fear that,
say Trump, has dictatorial tendency? and yet, the fear plays into his hands were he desire to be Caesar...

Unbelievable what this mildest of "pandemics" has revealed about the true nature of man,
too many of the population is happy to be one of Aristotle's "slave class."
Obedience for security (and the scraps from Longshank's table).

 

[bellisarius]

There is a well documented model of the "behavior changing" that you refer to. So well documented that the CIA/DIA/FBI and epidemiologists have picked it up and used it.

In 2005 World of Warcraft introduced a "virtual pandemic" into the game. It was a "bug" that was corrected within a week, but during that week the behavior of all the in game participants changed. That software bug became the basis of the models.

 

[Lancecastor19]

There is a well documented model of the "behavior changing" that you refer to. So well documented that the CIA/DIA/FBI and epidemiologists have picked it up and used it.

In 2005 World of Warcraft introduced a "virtual pandemic" into the game. It was a "bug" that was corrected within a week, but during that week the behavior of all the in game participants changed. That software bug became the basis of the models.

My son’s future father in law, who is a person you’d immediately recognize as smart and successful if i typed his name, believes that 5G is the distribution network for chinese viruses and the towers are placed in non-white locations to kill them off.

I respect and recommend a certain degree of healthy skepticism, but the cia doing behavioral studies on WOW users and using cell towers to kill non-whites is a bit much, i think.

 

[SpeareChucker]

It's a lot much.

It's Flat-Earth Society level much...

 

[Lancecastor19]

I told the boy that the beauty of America is anyone can wind up ultra wealthy.

And with fathers in law its generally best just to smile and nod.

 

[bellisarius]

My son’s future father in law, who is a person you’d immediately recognize as smart and successful if i typed his name, believes that 5G is the distribution network for chinese viruses and the towers are placed in non-white locations to kill them off.

I respect and recommend a certain degree of healthy skepticism, but the cia doing behavioral studies on WOW users and using cell towers to kill non-whites is a bit much, i think.

Plague Bug

 

[Lancecastor19]

Plague Bug

Okay, so it’s just the future fil that’s crazy.

 

[jomar]

ishtat sort or humble brag?

He deserves it. It’s been a hard road to becoming the assistant manager at McDonald’s.

 

[bellisarius]

Okay, so it’s just the future fil that’s crazy.

If you go back and reread the blurb you'll notice that they re-introduced a similar "bug" in 2008.............on purpose. That was done at the behest of the CIA so as to get a second model to work with. Blizzard claims otherwise, but DC leaks like a sieve.

 

[Lancecastor19]

If you go back and reread the blurb you'll notice that they re-introduced a similar "bug" in 2008.............on purpose. That was done at the behest of the CIA so as to get a second model to work with. Blizzard claims otherwise, but DC leaks like a sieve.

Online gaming is probably the source of lots of backdoor research data.

 

[bellisarius]

Online gaming is probably the source of lots of backdoor research data.

Everybody's mining data from somewhere.

 

[Rightguide]

It's a moving target to be sure.

Vat is taking a shot based on the numbers known today along with his own prognostication.

What one of the major problems is is that the death rate is being based on known infections vs deaths and that is a bogus number. The correct death rate would be based on deaths vs TOTAL infections and that's a number no one has.

There is a recent study that suggests that the total infections is far higher than anyone realized in that the disease seems to have very little effect in the way of symptoms with a great many people. The link to that study is contained in the below linked post.

Link to recent study

Current deaths in the United States are attributed to the Virus as long as the deceased tests positive at the time of death, regardless of the actual cause of death, or preexisting life threatening causes. Hospitals have economic incentives to report deaths as Corona related as well.