The Coronavirus, not the beer

[thethe]

The answer is you use excess mortality as a starting point but make adjustments. There are lots of moving parts that have to be modeled. Deaths from traffic accidents for example. I'm sure they are down to varying degrees across the country.

I agree pluses and minuses need to be considered.

I'd be interested in how they gauge the difference between other causes of death like cancer where treatment was received in prior years and not this year.

 

[nsacpi]

Without a widely distributable vaccine or effective treatment, the number seems reasonable.

200,000 deaths is consistent with 50 million infections and an IFR of 0.4. All three numbers are conservative imo.

 

[The Tariff King]

So the revised Murray model that said 60k deaths. Was that by August? Or end of year that they projected 60k.

We're passing 60k by tomorrow.

 

[nsacpi]

So the revised Murray model that said 60k deaths. Was that by August? Or end of year that they projected 60k.

We're passing 60k by tomorrow.

I think his model stops in August.

 

[The Tariff King]

I think his model stops in August.

So the 100k-200k was more accurate before they revised it down to 60k?

It seems by August we will be at 100k.

 

[nsacpi]

Gilead reports "positive data" on remdesivir.

 

[thethe]

Gilead reports "positive data" on remdesivir.

Wonder why the WHO was so quick to call it a failure a week ago.

 

[nsacpi]

So the 100k-200k was more accurate before they revised it down to 60k?

It seems by August we will be at 100k.

It's hard to keep track of these forecasts. Some are for the full year. Some cut off in August. The White House didnt even specify a time horizon when the put out that 100,000 to 266,000 range. It was a mystery even to the researchers they reached out to.

 

[The Tariff King]

This is what I like to see.

 

[thethe]

This is what I like to see.

It's called immunity walls.

 

[Carp]

Gilead reports "positive data" on remdesivir.

Fingers crossed on this.

 

[Carp]

So if remdesivir does prove to treat the virus well and the death rate drops well below .1%, will thethe and sturg admit Sweden's plan was wrong?

 

[thethe]

So if remdesivir does prove to treat the virus well and the death rate drops well below .1%, will thethe and sturg admit Sweden's plan was wrong?

No of course not because the IFR is already .1%

But you're staying a plan is to stay indoors till a treatment was found?

 

[Runnin]

So the revised Murray model that said 60k deaths. Was that by August? Or end of year that they projected 60k.

We're passing 60k by tomorrow.

That model has now been re-revised to 74K.

 

[Carp]

No of course not because the IFR is already .1%

But you're staying a plan is to stay indoors till a treatment was found?

Sweden has one of the highest per capita death rates in the world, and multiple times their neighbors. They easily could have prevented deaths had they locked down.

Where are you getting that .1% from anyways?

 

[Carp]

The Swedish model only works if herd immunity or stopping a 2nd outbreak is the goal. If a good treatment or vaccine is developed in the meantime, it's a wasted endeavor that allowed a bunch of people to die that didn't need to.

 

[thethe]

Sweden has one of the highest per capita death rates in the world, and multiple times their neighbors. They easily could have prevented deaths had they locked down.

Where are you getting that .1% from anyways?

Adjustment for serological testing and horrible policies.

 

[thethe]

The Swedish model only works if herd immunity or stopping a 2nd outbreak is the goal. If a good treatment or vaccine is developed in the meantime, it's a wasted endeavor that allowed a bunch of people to die that didn't need to.

You dont make policy for a pie in the sky events that are impossible to predict.

This treatment might fall flat on its ass.

Sweden treated their citizens like adults. We are not.

 

[Carp]

You dont make policy for a pie in the sky events that are impossible to predict.

This treatment might fall flat on its ass.

Sweden treated their citizens like adults. We are not.

The entire world is working on treatment options and a finding a vaccine, but these are "pie in the sky events"?

Yes, this treatment could prove to be nothing. The question posed was IF, this drug (or any other drug for that matter) proves viable and significantly reduces the death rate, is the Swedish model still a good plan?

 

[thethe]

The entire world is working on treatment options and a finding a vaccine, but these are "pie in the sky events"?

Yes, this treatment could prove to be nothing. The question posed was IF, this drug (or any other drug for that matter) proves viable and significantly reduces the death rate, is the Swedish model still a good plan?

Yes because it allowed their citizens to be adults. End of discussion from my end.

If you're telling me though at the start of this we KNEW that in 4 months a treatment was going to be available then sure its debatable.