And Texas Caves In

time2roll wrote:
Yes all the data is junk until we have a year behind us. This is just to contrast the comparisons where we have years and years of data in other areas. For instance it is impossible to compare to other flu deaths. If you think the last two days are the peak that is great. I don't know that we will be double in 30 days or half. I don't know.

The experts in this sort of thing are building those curves though admittedly they were also quite erroneous just days ago and predicted a doomsday. My thinking is that if those overly pessimistic models are showing a curve with a decline, it's probably still the worst-case version and we are on a real decline. Also the news is reporting that new hospitalizations are dropping in NY which is our worst-case epicenter. The deaths will peak later since people tend to last for a while in the hospital. Incidentally I've read somewhere that only about half of those on ventilators survive which is pretty sad.

There is also a lot of study that goes into infection rates. There's the concept of R naught, which defines how fast something can spread. Initially without data, that number is hard to determine but as time has gone by and with more data they are dialing it in. So while we don't know the full extent of this particular virus, it's also not completely unpredictable.

It seems clear to me that it can be far more fatal to older folks with other health issues than the flu is. When people compare it to the flu I think they are only considering the overall death toll and not what the specific virus can do. From that measure, it may not end up much worse that a severe flu season but will be in part due to the preventative actions people (not just those in government) have taken.

Thanks for the discussion.