Spekulatius Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 It’s pretty sure that in terms of fatalities per 1M , the US ( currently at 502/ 1M) will exceed Italy (currently at 582/1M) in a about month. Who would have thought this in March? Also, while we are at it, Italy’s population density is 532 people/ mi^2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rb Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 The China and Russia vaccines will probably be vilified by the left as an election interference serum.... Hey man, you wanna inject yourself with the Russian vaccine sold to you by Putin you go right ahead. I'm gonna continue to skip eating out for a few extra months and wait for the one from AstraZeneca, Sanofi, or JNJ. Full Disclosure: I also don't drive a Lada, or fly or airliners named Ilyushin or Tupolev. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 The China and Russia vaccines will probably be vilified by the left as an election interference serum.... I don't think the Chinese vaccine will be provided to the US, with such a high tension at the moment. China has been aggressively asking countries buying its medical supplies to praise the Chinese Communist Party, which pissed off a lot of countries. I heard a story that in Germany, there was a deal that every time a flight full of masks land, the city mayor has to organize a welcome party and praise the Chinese Community Party in the air port. Otherwise the masks will not be unloaded. I don't think that works with Trump. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurgis Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 The China and Russia vaccines will probably be vilified by the left as an election interference serum.... Hey man, you wanna inject yourself with the Russian vaccine sold to you by Putin you go right ahead. I'm gonna continue to skip eating out for a few extra months and wait for the one from AstraZeneca, Sanofi, or JNJ. Full Disclosure: I also don't drive a Lada, or fly or airliners named Ilyushin or Tupolev. Phase 3 trials are for wussies. True men chew glass, drink jet fuel, and do not need no f**king vaccines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Hjorth Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 Phase 3 trials are for wussies. True men chew glass, drink jet fuel, and do not need no f**king vaccines. Jurgis, I think you forgot to add [, ref. the Russian context here] "... and go on summer vacation trecking in "the Russian [now, for some years "untouched" & left alone] national park" called "Tjernobyl"." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rb Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 Phase 3 trials are for wussies. True men chew glass, drink jet fuel, and do not need no f**king vaccines. Jurgis, I think you forgot to add [, ref. the Russian context here] "... and go on summer vacation trecking in "the Russian [now, for some years "untouched" & left alone] national park" called "Tjernobyl"." It's certified COVID free! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 Today is 3 months since Taiwan had its 7th and last COVID death. If the US had Taiwan’s per capita rate of COVID deaths, it would have had 97 deaths instead of 163,463. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 Case Fatality Rate: NZ 1.4% US 3.2% Deaths per 100K POP NZ 0.45 US 49.8 GDP Q2 2020 Growth NZ -1.6% US -32.9% Do the demographics, land mass size, population, population density etc too. NYC has a population density of 38,424 per square kilometer NZ has a population density of 15 people per square kilometer. Complete waste of time even looking at this comparison. Why dont you post a twitter link on the data from Antarctica to really hammer the point home. Hold on there just a minute. You make accusations of cherry picking the data then you do exactly that. Instead of comparing population density of the U.S., you use NYC. And you do that because the comparison between the two countries doesn’t support your argument. NZ population density: 15 people /sqK US population density: 36 people /sqK NOT 38,424 / sqK Pretty dishonest trying to compare the country to NYC. How about sticking to the facts for a change. Yeah, and while some countries like NZ have factors that help them, they can't explain the difference, by far. they are doing well because they did the right things, had leadership and followed the science. If they had not done these things, they'd be doing badly, their population density or whatever wouldn't save them. And as I posted above, highly dense places like Taiwan and Singapore did pretty well too. I mean, Europe had really bad outbreaks (Italy, Spain) and worse demographics and density than the US, but did the common sense scientific things and now Florida has more cases and deaths than the 450m people in the EU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 The China and Russia vaccines will probably be vilified by the left as an election interference serum.... Cutting corners on the science is dangerous both because it can lead to people getting exposed and dying when they think they're protected and aren't, and because if there are safety or efficacy issues, it can cause long-lasting backlash against vaccines in general, leading to more deaths and suffering over decades. You already have crackpots making stuff up about vaccines, if you give them something real because you don't do things right, it'll be bad. From what I've seen, Russia is talking about a phase 1 vaccine that has been tested on hundreds of people... That's pretty bad science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 Short 6-minute interview with Tomas Pueyo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samwise Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 The China and Russia vaccines will probably be vilified by the left as an election interference serum.... Cutting corners on the science is dangerous both because it can lead to people getting exposed and dying when they think they're protected and aren't, and because if there are safety or efficacy issues, it can cause long-lasting backlash against vaccines in general, leading to more deaths and suffering over decades. You already have crackpots making stuff up about vaccines, if you give them something real because you don't do things right, it'll be bad. From what I've seen, Russia is talking about a phase 1 vaccine that has been tested on hundreds of people... That's pretty bad science. Is the concern with the Russian vaccine: 1. Safety? 2. effectiveness? Safety: If the virus kills 0.6% people and the vaccine has dangerous side effects 0.6% of the time, you haven't really gained much at the population level. Effectiveness: OTOH, if its not truly effective, you will start being spikes in cases as people get infected. Its a loss of resources and credibility, but for a poor country it might be worth the shot that it does actually work well. Agreed it's not unto the usual standards, but in the current scenario everything is now a risk-reward decision in real time with limited information. Safety would probably worry me the most here. So Putin's injected his daughter to allay those fears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cigarbutt Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 all the stuff i read suggest herd immunity is long ways off. even in new york now. heard immunity needs 60% plus infected. No, herd immunity might require that 60%, more or less, be *resistant* to the virus. That can be achieved through antibodies acquired by virtue of having already had the virus, antibodies from a vaccine, or resistance from having already had a different coronavirus. So, from what I can see, there have been ~5m cases of covid that have been officially laboratory diagnosed, and seroprevalence studies have suggested that 10x or 15x the number of official cases generally show the presence of antibodies. So, are we at 50m or 75m in the US with antibodies today? That would be 15% or 20% of the national population that might have antibodies. Strangely, at the national level, the cases appear to be on the down-swing. Anybody got any theories why the cases were 70k+/day a couple of weeks ago and ~50k/day today? That would be what level of R0? Did people suddenly adopt social distancing strategies, or is this peak virus? If it is actually peak virus, there would be a long way to go on the downside of the curve before the virus disappears, but the apocalyptic assertions seem to be on hold. SJ The answer to the above bolded question is i don't know. The answer, though somehow, contains features that 'we' don't control or even understand... Reviewing some aspects around the Spanish Flu episode may be helpful. Coronaviruses typically feature a slow genetic drift and the most likely outcome is that the virus will accommodate selective pressures (behavioral and growing herd immunity) and will slowly become a milder and seasonal form of disease but many alternative outcomes are possible. In other words, the virus intrinsic trajectory itself will be a determining factor behind trends, subsequent waves etc. When comparing the pathogenic potential severity to population outcome ratio of the Spanish Flu to the Coronavirus episode, Covid-19 is, at least so far, much less pathogenic but the population outcome reached, so far, has been uneven and often much less favorable, relative to the pathogenic potential, despite the obvious progress that has been achieved on so many levels since 1918-9. Why? Some references for those interested or having potential to adjust the thesis going forward: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3291398/ https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/187/12/2596/5068408 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/208354 Even in 1918-9 though, it was shown that uneven applications of community mitigating measures resulted in uneven results (mortality) but our world now is more 'connected' and that comes with its own set of advantages and (un)intended consequences. ---o---o--- On the crying wolf for nothing theme which recurrently appears in this thread and which may have relevance to the above section, some threads and posts don't age well but one can learn from them. An example: TL;DR version: Some people that 'believed' that this was only like the flu are likely to (consciously or not) disregard convincing arguments going against their beliefs and the same people may even 'forget' to associate the benefits of actions that they condemned along the way. This coronavirus story has been very humbling along the way from a scientific standpoint but the most surprising 'social' finding has been that a large part of some populations have had difficulty integrating knowledge and have even shown an unusual pride of ignorance. --- Edit: addition on masks It's often mentioned that there are two solitudes in the US. i would submit that some differences are more marginal, like in a compounding interest kind of way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 The China and Russia vaccines will probably be vilified by the left as an election interference serum.... Cutting corners on the science is dangerous both because it can lead to people getting exposed and dying when they think they're protected and aren't, and because if there are safety or efficacy issues, it can cause long-lasting backlash against vaccines in general, leading to more deaths and suffering over decades. You already have crackpots making stuff up about vaccines, if you give them something real because you don't do things right, it'll be bad. From what I've seen, Russia is talking about a phase 1 vaccine that has been tested on hundreds of people... That's pretty bad science. Is the concern with the Russian vaccine: 1. Safety? 2. effectiveness? Safety: If the virus kills 0.6% people and the vaccine has dangerous side effects 0.6% of the time, you haven't really gained much at the population level. Effectiveness: OTOH, if its not truly effective, you will start being spikes in cases as people get infected. Its a loss of resources and credibility, but for a poor country it might be worth the shot that it does actually work well. Agreed it's not unto the usual standards, but in the current scenario everything is now a risk-reward decision in real time with limited information. Safety would probably worry me the most here. So Putin's injected his daughter to allay those fears. Not the right way to look at it. You don't gamble with whole populations by injecting them with unproven medicines. This kind of callous thinking is what got the US and Russia in their messes in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orthopa Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 Case Fatality Rate: NZ 1.4% US 3.2% Deaths per 100K POP NZ 0.45 US 49.8 GDP Q2 2020 Growth NZ -1.6% US -32.9% Do the demographics, land mass size, population, population density etc too. NYC has a population density of 38,424 per square kilometer NZ has a population density of 15 people per square kilometer. Complete waste of time even looking at this comparison. Why dont you post a twitter link on the data from Antarctica to really hammer the point home. Hold on there just a minute. You make accusations of cherry picking the data then you do exactly that. Instead of comparing population density of the U.S., you use NYC. And you do that because the comparison between the two countries doesn’t support your argument. NZ population density: 15 people /sqK US population density: 36 people /sqK NOT 38,424 / sqK Pretty dishonest trying to compare the country to NYC. How about sticking to the facts for a change. Your right, my fault. The US is extremely homogeneous and no way the population density of NYC contributed in a negative fashion to death counts, GDP loss, and the spread of the virus through out the country. Thanks!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samwise Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 The China and Russia vaccines will probably be vilified by the left as an election interference serum.... Cutting corners on the science is dangerous both because it can lead to people getting exposed and dying when they think they're protected and aren't, and because if there are safety or efficacy issues, it can cause long-lasting backlash against vaccines in general, leading to more deaths and suffering over decades. You already have crackpots making stuff up about vaccines, if you give them something real because you don't do things right, it'll be bad. From what I've seen, Russia is talking about a phase 1 vaccine that has been tested on hundreds of people... That's pretty bad science. Is the concern with the Russian vaccine: 1. Safety? 2. effectiveness? Safety: If the virus kills 0.6% people and the vaccine has dangerous side effects 0.6% of the time, you haven't really gained much at the population level. Effectiveness: OTOH, if its not truly effective, you will start being spikes in cases as people get infected. Its a loss of resources and credibility, but for a poor country it might be worth the shot that it does actually work well. Agreed it's not unto the usual standards, but in the current scenario everything is now a risk-reward decision in real time with limited information. Safety would probably worry me the most here. So Putin's injected his daughter to allay those fears. Not the right way to look at it. You don't gamble with whole populations by injecting them with unproven medicines. This kind of callous thinking is what got the US and Russia in their messes in the first place. Not supporting Putin's decision here, which s probably more driven by the propaganda value and his domestic political needs. I do hope the planning for the next pandemic considers questions like the following. I certainly haven't seen them discussed anywhere. If this virus had an IFR of 50% (Ebola like) with huge infectiousness, and you offered me a vaccine which had a 1% side-effect of death. I would be sorely tempted to take that "side-effect" risk as the lesser of two evils. The current IFR is much lower, making that vaccine much less tempting. I would want way more safety and effectiveness, but not sure how much more. Surely not at the usual standards where things take 10 years. So how much less can one settle for as an individual or as a country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spekulatius Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 The China and Russia vaccines will probably be vilified by the left as an election interference serum.... Cutting corners on the science is dangerous both because it can lead to people getting exposed and dying when they think they're protected and aren't, and because if there are safety or efficacy issues, it can cause long-lasting backlash against vaccines in general, leading to more deaths and suffering over decades. You already have crackpots making stuff up about vaccines, if you give them something real because you don't do things right, it'll be bad. From what I've seen, Russia is talking about a phase 1 vaccine that has been tested on hundreds of people... That's pretty bad science. Is the concern with the Russian vaccine: 1. Safety? 2. effectiveness? Safety: If the virus kills 0.6% people and the vaccine has dangerous side effects 0.6% of the time, you haven't really gained much at the population level. Effectiveness: OTOH, if its not truly effective, you will start being spikes in cases as people get infected. Its a loss of resources and credibility, but for a poor country it might be worth the shot that it does actually work well. Agreed it's not unto the usual standards, but in the current scenario everything is now a risk-reward decision in real time with limited information. Safety would probably worry me the most here. So Putin's injected his daughter to allay those fears. Not the right way to look at it. You don't gamble with whole populations by injecting them with unproven medicines. This kind of callous thinking is what got the US and Russia in their messes in the first place. Not supporting Putin's decision here, which s probably more driven by the propaganda value and his domestic political needs. I do hope the planning for the next pandemic considers questions like the following. I certainly haven't seen them discussed anywhere. If this virus had an IFR of 50% (Ebola like) with huge infectiousness, and you offered me a vaccine which had a 1% side-effect of death. I would be sorely tempted to take that "side-effect" risk as the lesser of two evils. The current IFR is much lower, making that vaccine much less tempting. I would want way more safety and effectiveness, but not sure how much more. Surely not at the usual standards where things take 10 years. So how much less can one settle for as an individual or as a country? Looking at risk vs benefit is fair. It does matter if the IFR rate is 50% vs 0.6%. My concern with having politics messing with the process is the risk and benefits arnt’t really known of the numbers presented are fudged. Then people might make wrong decisions based on faulty/compromised data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwericb Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 " 'Don't they care?': Europeans astonished as U.S. hits 5 million cases” “ROME -- With confirmed coronavirus cases in the U.S. hitting 5 million Sunday, by far the highest of any country, the failure of the most powerful nation in the world to contain the scourge has been met with astonishment and alarm in Europe. Perhaps nowhere outside the U.S. is America's bungled virus response viewed with more consternation than in Italy, which was ground zero of Europe's epidemic. Italians were unprepared when the outbreak exploded in February, and the country still has one of the world's highest official death tolls at over 35,000. But after a strict nationwide, 10-week lockdown, vigilant tracing of new clusters and general acceptance of mask mandates and social distancing, Italy has become a model of virus containment. https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/don-t-they-care-europeans-astonished-as-u-s-hits-5-million-cases-1.5057041 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardGibbons Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Do the demographics, land mass size, population, population density etc too. NYC has a population density of 38,424 per square kilometer NZ has a population density of 15 people per square kilometer. Complete waste of time even looking at this comparison. Why dont you post a twitter link on the data from Antarctica to really hammer the point home. Hold on there just a minute. You make accusations of cherry picking the data then you do exactly that. Instead of comparing population density of the U.S., you use NYC. And you do that because the comparison between the two countries doesn’t support your argument. NZ population density: 15 people /sqK US population density: 36 people /sqK NOT 38,424 / sqK Pretty dishonest trying to compare the country to NYC. How about sticking to the facts for a change. Your right, my fault. The US is extremely homogeneous and no way the population density of NYC contributed in a negative fashion to death counts, GDP loss, and the spread of the virus through out the country. Thanks!!! This is a hilarious interaction. Orthopa: "I'll spin some numbers while simultaneously accusing someone else of spinning!" <Gregmal predictably validates the approach by accusing some nebulous left of spin> Orthopa: "Haha! I'm brilliant! Nobody realizes what I did!" cwericb: "Umm, dude, you know you're basically comparing a country to a city? Can you at least pretend to honestly analyse the situation?" Orthopa: "Darn.... Umm, can't admit fault, gotta go on the offence! Well, um, New York City has lots of people which is bad in a pandemic, and that's completely the point that I was trying to make in my other post! And you're just stupid for not seeing it, and deserve lots of abuse!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalal.Holdings Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Do the demographics, land mass size, population, population density etc too. NYC has a population density of 38,424 per square kilometer NZ has a population density of 15 people per square kilometer. Complete waste of time even looking at this comparison. Why dont you post a twitter link on the data from Antarctica to really hammer the point home. Hold on there just a minute. You make accusations of cherry picking the data then you do exactly that. Instead of comparing population density of the U.S., you use NYC. And you do that because the comparison between the two countries doesn’t support your argument. NZ population density: 15 people /sqK US population density: 36 people /sqK NOT 38,424 / sqK Pretty dishonest trying to compare the country to NYC. How about sticking to the facts for a change. Your right, my fault. The US is extremely homogeneous and no way the population density of NYC contributed in a negative fashion to death counts, GDP loss, and the spread of the virus through out the country. Thanks!!! This is a hilarious interaction. Orthopa: "I'll spin some numbers while simultaneously accusing someone else of spinning!" <Gregmal predictably validates the approach by accusing some nebulous left of spin> Orthopa: "Haha! I'm brilliant! Nobody realizes what I did!" cwericb: "Umm, dude, you know you're basically comparing a country to a city? Can you at least pretend to honestly analyse the situation?" Orthopa: "Darn.... Umm, can't admit fault, gotta go on the offence! Well, um, New York City has lots of people which is bad in a pandemic, and that's completely the point that I was trying to make in my other post! And you're just stupid for not seeing it, and deserve lots of abuse!" Bravo. The thread is now more entertaining than informative. "NYC was so botched due to failed leadership as evidenced by huge number of cases"...but at the same time: "the only reason NZ has low cases because it has such low pop density!" (don't tell these folks about the densities in TX/FL vs NY/NJ...) "NY covid deaths are so high and show how badly libs failed" ...but at the same time: "the NY covid deaths were not real, but faked on the death certificates" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregmal Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Aaaaaand, at the same time, out of the other corner of the mouth, Trump is responsible for 160k+ deaths! If Trump is responsible, so are governors, no? Probably even moreso. Or...there's other factors at play, such as density, etc.... LOL you guys cant even be consistent. Yup, entertainment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurgis Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Do the demographics, land mass size, population, population density etc too. NYC has a population density of 38,424 per square kilometer NZ has a population density of 15 people per square kilometer. Complete waste of time even looking at this comparison. Why dont you post a twitter link on the data from Antarctica to really hammer the point home. Hold on there just a minute. You make accusations of cherry picking the data then you do exactly that. Instead of comparing population density of the U.S., you use NYC. And you do that because the comparison between the two countries doesn’t support your argument. NZ population density: 15 people /sqK US population density: 36 people /sqK NOT 38,424 / sqK Pretty dishonest trying to compare the country to NYC. How about sticking to the facts for a change. Your right, my fault. The US is extremely homogeneous and no way the population density of NYC contributed in a negative fashion to death counts, GDP loss, and the spread of the virus through out the country. Thanks!!! This is a hilarious interaction. Orthopa: "I'll spin some numbers while simultaneously accusing someone else of spinning!" <Gregmal predictably validates the approach by accusing some nebulous left of spin> Orthopa: "Haha! I'm brilliant! Nobody realizes what I did!" cwericb: "Umm, dude, you know you're basically comparing a country to a city? Can you at least pretend to honestly analyse the situation?" Orthopa: "Darn.... Umm, can't admit fault, gotta go on the offence! Well, um, New York City has lots of people which is bad in a pandemic, and that's completely the point that I was trying to make in my other post! And you're just stupid for not seeing it, and deserve lots of abuse!" Bravo. The thread is now more entertaining than informative. "NYC was so botched due to failed leadership as evidenced by huge number of cases"...but at the same time: "the only reason NZ has low cases because it has such low pop density!" (don't tell these folks about the densities in TX/FL vs NY/NJ...) "NY covid deaths are so high and show how badly libs failed" ...but at the same time: "the NY covid deaths were not real, but faked on the death certificates" Dude. Making two contradictory wrong claims at the same time is a sign of truly stable genius. Trump is proud of his children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clutch Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 New Zealand is back to lockdowns over 4 untraceable transmission cases. Some will say "yes, that is the way to control the virus". On the other hand, some will say "you are in this lockdown limbo until when?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalal.Holdings Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Dude. Making two contradictory wrong claims at the same time is a sign of truly stable genius. Trump is proud of his children. Truth. Let’s see if we get four more years of this, we will surely reach new, great heights! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Not supporting Putin's decision here, which s probably more driven by the propaganda value and his domestic political needs. I do hope the planning for the next pandemic considers questions like the following. I certainly haven't seen them discussed anywhere. If this virus had an IFR of 50% (Ebola like) with huge infectiousness, and you offered me a vaccine which had a 1% side-effect of death. I would be sorely tempted to take that "side-effect" risk as the lesser of two evils. The current IFR is much lower, making that vaccine much less tempting. I would want way more safety and effectiveness, but not sure how much more. Surely not at the usual standards where things take 10 years. So how much less can one settle for as an individual or as a country? We can come up with scenarios where it may make sense, but in the current real-world situation, the choice isn't between a phase 1 untested vaccine and no vaccine. It's to wait a little longer, and in the meantime, do the things that we know work to crush the number of infections and maintain it low, like most countries have done. That's the better path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted August 12, 2020 Share Posted August 12, 2020 Reported coronavirus deaths yesterday: • France: 0 • United Kingdom: 0 • Canada: 4 • Germany: 6 • Italy: 6 • United States: 1,450 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts