General > General Technical Chat
Working From Home - Impacts of Coronavirus
<< < (422/447) > >>
Ed.Kloonk:

--- Quote from: Nusa on July 24, 2020, 06:26:32 pm ---
--- Quote from: SilverSolder on July 24, 2020, 02:40:57 pm ---
--- Quote from: Nusa on July 24, 2020, 02:51:18 am ---
--- Quote from: SilverSolder on July 23, 2020, 08:31:29 pm ---Apparently California just today passed New York as the state with the highest number of Covid19 cases.  Exponential functions are a b!tch...

--- End quote ---

One of those statistics that misrepresents reality because it's not population adjusted. Go here and sort by Total case / 1M population. See where California is on that list (you may need to scroll). How about Arizona and Florida?

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

--- End quote ---

I am yet to be convinced that dividing the cases by the population makes a lot of sense.  - After all, it only takes one infected person to cause a problem, even if the population is 1.4Bn as in China.

Seen from that perspective, the important number is how many "carriers" are on the loose and potentially infecting the healthy population (whether the healthy population is 10K or 10Gig persons doesn't matter).

--- End quote ---

You divided cases by population when you compared two states to each other in the first place. You just failed to mention the fact that California has twice the population of New York state.

But let's go with your argument. If what counts is the number of carriers, then Total cases is still the wrong metric, since that's counting a LOT of people who aren't currently carriers, including those that are dead and those who are fully recovered. I'd suggest that population density matters as well. Did you know that the densest parts of the NYC metro area are actually in New Jersey? New Jersey actually beats New York and leads the nation when it comes to Deaths / 1M population.

--- End quote ---

It doesn't help that there are reports floating around that cause of death was adjusted to achieve extra funding.
SilverSolder:

--- Quote from: Nusa on July 24, 2020, 06:26:32 pm ---
--- Quote from: SilverSolder on July 24, 2020, 02:40:57 pm ---
--- Quote from: Nusa on July 24, 2020, 02:51:18 am ---
--- Quote from: SilverSolder on July 23, 2020, 08:31:29 pm ---Apparently California just today passed New York as the state with the highest number of Covid19 cases.  Exponential functions are a b!tch...

--- End quote ---

One of those statistics that misrepresents reality because it's not population adjusted. Go here and sort by Total case / 1M population. See where California is on that list (you may need to scroll). How about Arizona and Florida?

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

--- End quote ---

I am yet to be convinced that dividing the cases by the population makes a lot of sense.  - After all, it only takes one infected person to cause a problem, even if the population is 1.4Bn as in China.

Seen from that perspective, the important number is how many "carriers" are on the loose and potentially infecting the healthy population (whether the healthy population is 10K or 10Gig persons doesn't matter).

--- End quote ---

You divided cases by population when you compared two states to each other in the first place. You just failed to mention the fact that California has twice the population of New York state.

But let's go with your argument. If what counts is the number of carriers, then Total cases is still the wrong metric, since that's counting a LOT of people who aren't currently carriers, including those that are dead and those who are fully recovered. I'd suggest that population density matters as well. Did you know that the densest parts of the NYC metro area are actually in New Jersey? New Jersey actually beats New York and leads the nation when it comes to Deaths / 1M population.

--- End quote ---

Well, total cases would include the number of carriers (i.e. they were carriers at some point...  not necessarily now, and they may not even be alive any longer).  I agree it isn't a super useful number.

More useful would be to estimate the number of currently active carriers from the number of daily new cases over the most recent 2 weeks. 

That would make the daily number of new cases the most important metric - is the number of active carriers going up or down?

Seen from this angle, we can then talk about what drives the daily number of new cases.  The previous two week's number of carriers is the biggest factor, followed by things like population density, hygiene, mask wearing, and the rest of it.   The Asian countries understood this from the get-go and went after the carriers early on, with zero tolerance - it is how they wiped the virus out.





PlainName:

--- Quote ---That would make the daily number of new cases the most important metric.
--- End quote ---

Only if you make it relative, such as a percentage increase or decrease. Absolute numbers would be meaningless.

Edit: but even percentages would be wrong. Whatever numbers you come up with you'd probably need to take account of population density (100 people spread out are going to have a lower R than the same number all in the same street, for instance). And the density distribution - several dense ares, like towns, would skew the numbers in a different way to the same numbers over the same area but evenly spread.
SilverSolder:

--- Quote from: dunkemhigh on July 24, 2020, 07:57:00 pm ---
--- Quote ---That would make the daily number of new cases the most important metric.
--- End quote ---

Only if you make it relative, such as a percentage increase or decrease. Absolute numbers would be meaningless.

Edit: but even percentages would be wrong. Whatever numbers you come up with you'd probably need to take account of population density (100 people spread out are going to have a lower R than the same number all in the same street, for instance). And the density distribution - several dense ares, like towns, would skew the numbers in a different way to the same numbers over the same area but evenly spread.

--- End quote ---

So if we had 200 new cases yesterday and 220 new ones today,  we would presumably agree that the trend is going the wrong direction and we need to reverse it.  No matter what the other factors are.
Zero999:

--- Quote from: tom66 on July 23, 2020, 08:33:42 pm ---The USA really is a bizarre test case for what happens when you basically stick your fingers in your ears for several months and pretend COVID is not a thing.  Whaddya know, cases climb even faster.

I think the sad thing is if they had locked down really hard for 2-3 months instead of the weak-willed lockdown where some states still had bars and restaurants open, they would have been in a situation similar to the UK, and would be cautiously reopening with screening at the borders and social distancing/mask requirements.

But now they've turned into one of a few countries in the world, that every other country wants to ban tourism and visits to.

--- End quote ---
The US is a vast country. Some states have done better than others. The problem is it's difficult to limit people travelling from one state to another. The central government should have emergency powers to restrict interstate travel.

As far as lockdowns are concerned, it's not binary. At one extreme is a total lockdown, when everyone is confined to their homes, are not allowed to go out for any reason and have essential items such as food rations delivered to their doors, by the authorities. This has been proven to completely eliminate COVID-19, from the area within a few weeks, but it only works in relatively small areas, because it requires a huge level of enforcement and people to deliver supplies. There are only to examples of complete lockdowns, I know of: Wuhan, China and Vo, Italy. At the other end of the spectrum, most things stay open, with only large gatherings of people prohibited. Sweden did the latter and whist it did have more deaths, than comparable countries, cases in the country have still fallen and they've faired better than much of the US.

Most of Europe had a fairly extensive lockdown, when people were only allowed to leave their homes for food and if they couldn't work from home, although lots of business were closed anyway. Now most countries have eased their lockdowns, whist keeping some social distancing measures in place and implementing contact tracing and isolation. Most US states seem to have made the mistake of easing the lockdowns too quickly and not implementing other measures to control the spread. The authorities should find out where most of the spread is occurring and focus their efforts of those areas, rather than applying blanket lockdowns.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod